Impact of Technology on Music & Movie Industries by Phil Wane

Music & Movie Industries Wikibook ITEC30011

PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Mon, 16 May 2011 15:06:03 UTC

Contents Articles Copyright infringement

Impact of illegal downloading on the film industry

File sharing

Metallica v. Napster, Inc.

The Pirate Bay trial

Music download

Digital rights management

References Article Sources and Contributors

Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors

Article Licenses License

Copyright infringement Copyright infringement is the unauthorized or prohibited use of works under copyright, infringing the copyright holder's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works.

"Piracy" The practice of labelling the infringement of exclusive rights in creative works as "piracy" predates statutory copyright law. Prior to the Statute of Anne 1709, the Stationers' Company of London in 1557 received a Royal Charter giving the company a monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter. Those who violated the charter were labelled pirates as early as 1603.[1] After the establishment of copyright law with the 1709 Statute of Anne in Britain, the term "piracy" has been used to refer to the unauthorized An advertisement for copyright and patent preparation services from 1906, when copyright manufacturing and selling of works in copyright.[2] Article 12 of the registration formalities were still required in the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic US. Works uses the term "piracy" in relation to copyright infringement, stating "Pirated works may be seized on importation into those countries of the Union where the original work enjoys legal protection."[3] Article 61 of the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires criminal procedures and penalties in cases of "wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale".[4] Piracy traditionally refers to acts intentionally committed for financial gain, though more recently, copyright holders have described online copyright infringement, particularly in relation to peer-to-peer file sharing networks, as "piracy."[2]

"Theft" Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as "theft". In law copyright infringement does not refer to actual theft, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.[5] Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft, holding, for instance, in the United States Supreme Court case Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property and that An unskippable anti-piracy film included on "...interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, movie DVDs equates copyright infringement with theft. conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright... 'an infringer of the copyright.'" In the case of copyright infringement the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law is invaded, i.e. exclusive rights, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.[6]

Enforcement Responsibility The enforcement of copyright is the responsibility of the copyright holder.[7] Article 50 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires that signatory countries enable courts to remedy copyright infringement with injunctions and the destruction of infringing products, and award damages.[4] More recently copyright holders have demanded that states act to defend copyright holders' rights and enforce copyright law through active policing of copyright infringement. It has been demanded that states provide criminal sanctions for all types of copyright infringement and pursue copyright infringement through administrative procedures, rather than the judicial due process required by TRIPs.[7]

Criminal Liability Article 61 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires that signatory countries establish criminal procedures and penalties in cases of "willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale".[4] More recently copyright holders have demanded that states provide criminal sanctions for all types of copyright infringement.[7]

Online Intermediary Liability Whether or not internet intermediaries have liability for copyright infringement by users, and without the intermediaries' authorisation, has been subject to debate and court cases in a number of countries.[8] Liability of online intermediaries has been one of the earliest legal issues surrounding the internet. Early court cases focused on the liability of internet service providers (ISPs) for hosting, transmitting or publishing content that could be actioned under civil or criminal law, such as libel, defamation, or pornography.[9] As different content was considered in different legal systems and in the absence of common definitions for "ISPs", "bulletin boards" or "online publishers", early law on online intermediaries' liability is widely different from country to country. The first laws on online intermediaries' liability were passed from the mid 1990s onwards and the debate has shifted away from questions about whether internet intermediaries are liable for different content, such as libellous content or copyright infringing content, towards a debate on whether online intermediaries should generally be made responsible for content accessible through their services or infrastructure.[10]

Internet intermediaries used to be understood primarily in terms of internet service providers (ISPs), however, internet intermediaries are now also understood to be internet portals, software and games providers, those providing virtual information such as interactive forums and comment facilities with or without a moderation system, aggregators, universities, libraries and archives, web search engines, chat rooms, web blogs, mailing lists, and any website which provides access to third party content through, for example, hyperlinks. Questions of liability have emerged in relation to internet communications infrastructure intermediaries other than ISPs, including internet backbone providers, cable companies and mobile communications providers.[11]

The BitTorrent protocol: In this animation, the colored bars beneath all of the 7 clients in the upper region above represent the file, with each color representing an individual piece of the file. After the initial pieces transfer from the seed (large system at the bottom), the pieces are individually transferred from client to client. The original seeder only needs to send out one copy of the file for all the clients to receive a copy. To stop animation, click browser's Stop or hit ESC key.

The US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998) and the European E-Commerce Directive (2000) provide online intermediaries with safe harbor provisions, known as mere conduit principle in the Directive. Online intermediaries who host content that infringes copyright are not liable, so long as they do not know about it and take actions once the infringing content is brought to their attention. However, questions have arisen in relation to online intermediaries that are not hosts, particularly in the context of copyright infringement through peer-to-peer file sharing networks. Such intermediaries may be regarded as enabling or assisting in the downloading and uploading of files by users, and may include the writer of a peer-to-peer software, the websites that allow users to download peer-to-peer software, and in the case of the BitTorrent protocol the torrent site website and the torrent tracker. These intermediaries do not host or transmit the files that infringe copyright, though they may be considered to be "pointing to" the files. Since the late 1990s copyright holders have taken legal actions against a number of peer-to-peer intermediaries, such as Napster, Grokster, eMule, SoulSeek and BitTorrent, and case law on the liability of internet service providers (ISPs) in relation to copyright infringement has emerged primarily in relation to these cases.[12] The decentralised structure of peer-to-peer networks does not sit easily with existing laws on online intermediaries' liability. The BitTorrent protocol established an entirely decentralised network architecture in order to distribute large files effectively and recent developments in peer-to-peer technology towards more complex network configurations are said to have been driven by a desire to avoid liability as intermediaries under existing laws.[13] While ISPs and other organisations acting as online intermediaries, such as libraries, have been given protection under existing safe harbor provisions in relation to copyright infringement, peer-to-peer file sharing intermediaries have been denied access to the safe harbor provisions in relation to copyright infringement. Legal action in relation to copyright infringement against peer-to-peer intermediaries, such as Napster, are generally brought in relation to principles of secondary liability for copyright infringement, such as contributory liability and vicarious liability.[14]

Countries where sharing files without profit is legal Downloading copied music is legal in some countries, such as Canada[15] and The Netherlands[16] , Spain[17] provided that the songs are not sold.

Russian Law Downloading music and films for home use is legal due to exception provided by section 1273 of Russian Federation Civil Code. A special 1% compensatory levy intended for copyright holders is collected from the price of certain goods (like computers or clean CD-RW disks).

See Also For a substantial discussion of copyright infringement in the domain of computer programs, see copyright infringement of software. • • • •

Abuse of information Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Anti-piracy Bootleg recording

• • • • •

Chan Nai-ming Copyfraud Copyleft Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 Copyright Directive, EU law on copyright

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• DADVSI, French implementation Copyrighted content on file sharing networks Counterfeit Counterfeit money Digital Millennium Copyright Act Digital rights management Don't Copy That Floppy Entertainment Law FBI Federation Against Copyright Theft Field v. Google FTA receiver Home Taping is Killing Music IFPI (International Federation of Phonogram and Videogram Producers) Impact of Illegal Downloading on the Film Industry Intellectual property infringement in the People's Republic of China Internet Privacy Act List of copyright case law Media law Metallica v. Napster, Inc. Music law Negativland

• Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act in the United States • Plagiarism • R2C2

Radio music ripping Substantial similarity Warez World Anti-Piracy Observatory You can click, but you can't hide

References [1] T. Dekker Wonderfull Yeare 1603 University of Oregon (http:/ / www. luminarium. org/ renascence-editions/ yeare. html) [2] Panethiere, Darrell (July – September 2005). "The Persistence of Piracy: The Consequences for Creativity, for Culture, and for Sustainable Development" (http:/ / portal. unesco. org/ culture/ en/ files/ 28696/ 11513329261panethiere_en. pdf/ panethiere_en. pdf). UNESO e-Copyright Bulletin. pp. 2. . [3] Panethiere, Darrell (July – September 2005). "The Persistence of Piracy: The Consequences for Creativity, for Culture, and for Sustainable Development" (http:/ / portal. unesco. org/ culture/ en/ files/ 28696/ 11513329261panethiere_en. pdf/ panethiere_en. pdf). UNESO e-Copyright Bulletin. pp. 14. . [4] Correa, Carlos Maria; Li, Xuan (2009). Intellectual property enforcement: international perspectives (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=bN3o1uwpKF4C& dq=copyright+ infringement+ international+ acta& source=gbs_navlinks_s). Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 208. ISBN 9781848446632. . [5] Clough, Jonathan (2010). Principles of Cybercrime (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=JVPnCqEuTksC& dq=copyright+ infringement+ theft& source=gbs_navlinks_s). Cambridge University Press. pp. 221. ISBN 9780521728126. . [6] Dowling v. United States (1985), 473 U.S. 207, pp. 217–218. [7] Correa, Carlos Maria; Li, Xuan (2009). Intellectual property enforcement: international perspectives (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=bN3o1uwpKF4C& dq=copyright+ infringement+ international+ acta& source=gbs_navlinks_s). Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 211. ISBN 9781848446632. . [8] Edwards, Lilian; Waelde, Charlotte (2005). "Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright Infringement" (http:/ / www. era. lib. ed. ac. uk/ bitstream/ 1842/ 2305/ 1/ wipo-onlineintermediaries. pdf) (pdf). Keynote paper at WIPO Workshop on Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright, Geneva. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). p. 2. . Retrieved September 2010. [9] Edwards, Lilian; Waelde, Charlotte (2005). "Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright Infringement" (http:/ / www. era. lib. ed. ac. uk/ bitstream/ 1842/ 2305/ 1/ wipo-onlineintermediaries. pdf) (pdf). Keynote paper at WIPO Workshop on Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright, Geneva. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). p. 4. . Retrieved September 2010. [10] Edwards, Lilian; Waelde, Charlotte (2005). "Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright Infringement" (http:/ / www. era. lib. ed. ac. uk/ bitstream/ 1842/ 2305/ 1/ wipo-onlineintermediaries. pdf) (pdf). Keynote paper at WIPO Workshop on Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright, Geneva. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). p. 5. . Retrieved September 2010. [11] Edwards, Lilian; Waelde, Charlotte (2005). "Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright Infringement" (http:/ / www. era. lib. ed. ac. uk/ bitstream/ 1842/ 2305/ 1/ wipo-onlineintermediaries. pdf) (pdf). Keynote paper at WIPO Workshop on Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright, Geneva. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). pp. 5–6. . Retrieved September 2010. [12] Edwards, Lilian; Waelde, Charlotte (2005). "Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright Infringement" (http:/ / www. era. lib. ed. ac. uk/ bitstream/ 1842/ 2305/ 1/ wipo-onlineintermediaries. pdf) (pdf). Keynote paper at WIPO Workshop on Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright, Geneva. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). p. 7. . Retrieved September 2010. [13] Edwards, Lilian; Waelde, Charlotte (2005). "Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright Infringement" (http:/ / www. era. lib. ed. ac. uk/ bitstream/ 1842/ 2305/ 1/ wipo-onlineintermediaries. pdf) (pdf). Keynote paper at WIPO Workshop on Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright, Geneva. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). p. 9. . Retrieved September 2010. [14] Edwards, Lilian; Waelde, Charlotte (2005). "Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright Infringement" (http:/ / www. era. lib. ed. ac. uk/ bitstream/ 1842/ 2305/ 1/ wipo-onlineintermediaries. pdf) (pdf). Keynote paper at WIPO Workshop on Online Intermediaries and Liability for Copyright, Geneva. World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). p. 10. . Retrieved September 2010. [15] "Your Interview: Michael Geist" (http:/ / www. cbc. ca/ news/ yourinterview/ 2008/ 04/ michael_geist. html). Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. 2008-04-07. . [16] "In depth: Downloading music" (http:/ / www. cbc. ca/ news/ background/ internet/ downloading_music. html). Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. 2006-05-01. . [17] "La red P2P es legal" (http:/ / www. bufetalmeida. com/ upload/ file/ sentenciaelrincondejesus. pdf) (pdf). . Retrieved May 2011.

Further reading • Johns, Adrian: Piracy. The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates. The University of Chicago Press, 2009, ISBN 978-0-226-40118-8 • Rosen, Ronald (2008). Music and Copyright. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195338367.

External links • A 2000 Salon.com article by Courtney Love addressing copyright infringement of music (http://archive.salon. com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html) • A 2001 reprint of two speeches given by Thomas Macaulay in Parliament in 1841, when the issue of copyright was being hammered out. (http://www.baen.com/library/palaver4.htm) • A 2003 article on CD Piracy in China from the music webzine www.CLUAS.com (http://www.cluas.com/ music/features/piracy_china.htm) • A 2008 article illustrating the effect of piracy on video games (http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html) • An article for students explaining the difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement (http://www. plagiarismchecker.com/plagiarism-vs-copyright.php) • How Corporate Law Inhibits Social Responsibility (http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0119-04.htm) • Movie and Record Industry Piracy Figures Incendiary, But Not Fact. (http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/ 6002/250billion.html) – June 2006 MP3 Newswire article challenges inflated copyright infringement claims by media companies • US Copyright Office (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html)

Impact of illegal downloading on the film industry The Impact of Illegal Downloading on the film industry The advent of advanced technology that allows Broadband Internet access on personal computers has made the illegal downloading of films increasingly common.[1] In the early days of the internet, films were held in formats that made them significantly harder to share than more easily shared music files, with the result that illegal downloading of films was less common. However, the rise of Bit Torrent protocol has made it possible to share large movie files over the internet more easily. If an individual engages in the sharing of copyrighted materials without gaining the necessary permission, then that person is acting illegally and can face prosecution. Illegal downloaders either remain unaware of the illegality of their actions or ignore the law. The potential punishments for the illegal downloading of films are the same as those for the illegal downloading of music but have yet far not been pursued with the same vigour by the film industry as by the music industry.

Impact of illegal downloading on the film industry

Forms of Illegal Downloading File Sharing Illegal file sharing is the newest form of copyright infringement, and remains the most common form of illegal downloading. In the 1990s, file sharing programmes were developed in order to allow internet users to share collections of music, small video clips and other small files. From the beginning, both users and copyright holders encountered problems with the file sharing process. Shared files could easily be infected with viruses that infected usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; computers, and copyright was easily infringed. A number of high profile lawsuits have been filed against individuals who had developed large collections of illegally downloaded material, however it has had little deterrent effect.[2] The most common ways in which a film can be illegally downloaded are via file sharing services, using peer to peer networks and through Bit Torrents. Peer to Peer networks operate through people using software that joins them with a peer-to-peer network to locate shared files on the computers of other users (who are connected to the network). Files can then be downloaded straight from user to user. .[3] Significant P2P clients have included soul seek and limewire, the latter was discontinued as a result of court action in 2010. [4] File hosting services work similarly, with an internet hosting service designed to host static content. The content hosted usually consists of large files which are not web pages. A significant file hosting site is rapidshare.com which has been active since 2005. [5] Legal DVD versions of films are typically released to the public three months after they have finished playing in cinemas, to allow the cinemas to offer films before they are available to view on home entertainment systems. However, film pirates have the ability to offer versions of films available for online downloading before they have finished their cinema runs, and in some cases, before they have been released into cinemas. These copies are always illegal and have been obtained and released without the permission of the copyright holders. Streaming Media streaming is the constant presenting of multimedia to an end user. Live streaming refers to the live broadcasting of multimedia over the internet, and it remains a popular means of viewing media both legally and illegally, especially among users who do not wish to permanently download a film, for example. [6] A media stream can be streamed in one of two ways. Live streaming works through a process called true streaming, that sends information straight to a computer or device without having the file that is being streamed save to a hard disk. The other way is that of on demand streaming that, through a process called progressive streaming ,more commonly known as progressive download. Progressive streaming involves saving a file to a hard disk and then having it played from that location. The main practical difference is that on demand streams are often saved to hard disks for extended amounts of time;while live streams are only made available at one time. Such as during the live broadcasting of a football match. [7]

Impact of illegal downloading on the film industry

Reasons for popularity New film releases debut at different times across the world, thereby giving audiences in some areas the chance to see a film before it can be seen by those in another region. As a result, some people may be encouraged to illegally access films that are already available in another part of the world. It also gives members of the original audiences to make illegal copies of the film while in the cinema. Audiences have become accustomed to viewing content online. On the internet, the illegal nature of the version of the film available may not be as obvious as a clearly bootlegged video or DVD.

Effects of illegal downloading on the industry The film industry remains concerned about illegal downloading of films. There has been controversy surrounding the handing out of preview DVDs or videos, also known as screeners, to those carrying out judging duties ahead of awards ceremonies. These screeners are made available to judges before the films are released to the cinemas. Film award panel members see the preview tapes as important to their work of awarding prizes and promoting films. Although only sent to members of judging panels, some have found their way into the hands of film pirates. In the US, an actor, Carmine Caridi, admitted that he had passed screeners which he had been sent as a film panel judge, on to a man, Russell Sprague, who in 2004 was convicted of illegally copying preview tapes for sale. In 2003, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), stopped the practise of sending out screeners as they claimed their release led to an increase in piracy of films. [8] Going into 2011, the cost to the film industry worldwide of illegal downloading of films is estimated to be in the region of £500 million a year, according to Liz Bales of the Industry Trust for Intellectual Property Awareness. She is hoping that the introduction of improved legal downloading services which are easier to use and more efficient will deter illegal use. [9] Although some illegally downloaded films can be of poor quality, and take a long time to download, illegal sites are improving. While films recorded from inside cinemas can suffer distortion, once the DVD has been officially released, the quality of the illegal copy available online improves. Faster broadband services are advantageous to illegal as well as legal sites. [10] Estimates released by theBritish Video Association (BVA) for the year 2003 to 2004 showed that the number of illegal downloads of films and television programmes may have increased to 1.67 million, three times the number estimated to have taken place the year before. This was estimated by the BVA to have cost the DVD industry in the UK £45 million in lost revenue. The DVD industry was worth around £2.42 billion to the British economy in 2003 . [11]

It is estimated that the UK film industry was worth around £4.3 billion to the UK’s economy, but that in 2007, illegal copying and sharing of films may have cost the economy up to £404 million. [12] DVD sales have accounted for around half the profits of the worldwide industry in the last ten years.[13] Jeremy Hunt, the UK’s Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, is investigating the possibility of laws requiring that sites that offer services which infringe copyright are shut down. He has ordered Ofcom (the government-approved regulatory authority for the telecommunications industries in the United Kingdom) to investigate, and they will report back on the possibilities in spring 2011. [14] An easy to use and inexpensive standardised platform for legal downloads is being investigated as an alternative for current illegal downloaders. “Cloud-based” storage is suggested as a possible way forward.[15] By 2008, the UK government was considering making it easier for those who downloaded music, films and television programmes illegally to have their internet access blocked. [16] The 2010 Digital Economy Bill is designed to make it the responsibility of the internet service provider to supply information regarding those who persist in downloading material illegally online. The government sees the threat of cutting off persistent offenders from the internet as a last resort, only to be enacted in extreme cases is which offenders have been located, challenged, but continue to make use of illegally downloaded materials. They see persuasion as the best way to deter offenders and to encourage

Impact of illegal downloading on the film industry people to transfer to legal routes of accessing film and music. [17] Moral and Creative Aspects Copyright laws exist in most countries to protect creators of new work. The UK’s Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (with the amendments set out in the Copyright and Trade Marks (Offences and Enforcement)), is the latest version of the UK’s copyright law. Two main types of people benefit from the enforcement of copyright laws. Creators of new material automatically own the moral or intellectual rights to their creation. These rights are not transferrable. However, the economic right can be transferred to third parties, for example, the publisher of a book or the part owner of the rights to a film script. Likewise in the United States of America, copyright issues are enshrined in law. US copyright law comes under the federal laws, as set out under the US Constitution. Rights are granted under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8, also referred to as the Copyright Clause. It has been suggested that British copyright laws were developed before the internet became widespread, and that the laws were therefore perhaps unprepared for the subsequent growth of the internet, and the issues raised. It was conceived and drawn up with reference to the more controllable, physical environment, and although the underlying tenets may remain suitable, some updating may be necessary. [18] The industry remains divided over the right way to meet the challenges of illegal downloading. James Murdoch, currently the Chairman and Chief Executive of News Corporation, Europe and Asia told a media summit in Abu Dhabi in 2010 that illegal downloading was no different from as stealing a handbag, and urged the authorities to track down and prosecute offenders. By contrast, at the same conference, Maurice Levy, the chief executive of Publicis, a French advertising organisation, noted that his grandchild did not see illegal downloading as stealing.[19] Illegal downloading is increasingly seen as acceptable and normal. There remains a debate over whether people who currently download films (and music) illegally would be willing to pay in order to ensure that their activities were legal. There is also debate over the effects on the film industry, and conflicting evidence has emerged in this area. Technical advances in the area of downloading and file sharing are continuing to appear making the situationfluid. Only as the situation develops will we be able to fully appreciate the impact of illegal film downloading, and the implications for both the industry and consumers.

References [1] | (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ 1/ hi/ entertainment/ 3692999. stm) BBC News: Internet Piracy Figures Triple, 2004 [2] | (http:/ / www. independent. co. uk/ life-style/ gadgets-and-tech/ features/ illegal-downloading-what-happens-if-youre-caught-1736013. html) Verkaik, “Illegal downloading-What happens if you’re caught. The Independent (2009) [3] | (http:/ / searchnetworking. techtarget. com/ definition/ peer-to-peer) Peer to Peer Definition, SearchingNetwork.com [4] | (http:/ / www. bbc. co. uk/ news/ technology-11635320) BBC News: LimeWire file-sharing service shut down in US. 2010 [5] | (http:/ / www. bbc. co. uk/ news/ technology-12163161) BBC News: Piracy websites attract billions of visits.2011 [6] | (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ 1/ hi/ programmes/ click_online/ 7017794. stm) Marc Cieslak BBC Click: Streaming future of internet TV.2011 [7] Grant and Meadows. (2009). Communication Technology Update and Fundamentals 11th Edition. pp.114 [8] | Last (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ 1/ hi/ entertainment/ film/ 3621293. stm) ]BBC News. (2011) [9] | (http:/ / www. guardian. co. uk/ film/ 2011/ mar/ 13/ illegal-downloads-threaten-british-film) ] Thorpe, V. Illegal movie downloads “threaten the future of the british film market” The Observer. (2011) [10] | (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ 1/ hi/ entertainment/ 3692999. stm) I bid BBC News [11] | (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ 1/ hi/ entertainment/ 3692999. stm) I bid BBC News [12] | (http:/ / www. skillset. org/ film/ industry/ article_6763_1. asp) Skillsnet. (2008)“Defining the industry”, [13] | I bid Thorpe [14] | (http:/ / www. guardian. co. uk/ commentisfree/ 2011/ mar/ 13/ film-piracy-illegal-downloads-internet)Editorial. Illegal Movie piracy: We need a hi-tech solution to illegal downloads The Observer. (2011) [15] | I Bid Editorial. [16] | (http:/ / technology. timesonline. co. uk/ tol/ news/ tech_and_web/ the_web/ article3353387. ece) ]Elliot,F. The Times Online (2008) [17] | (http:/ / www. bis. gov. uk/ digitaleconomybill) ] Department for Business Innovation and Skills (2009) “Digital Economy Bill”) [18] | I Bid Verkaik [19] | (http:/ / www. guardian. co. uk/ media/ 2010/ mar/ 10/ murdoch-illegal-dowloading-stealing-handbag) ]Martinson, J.The Guardian. (2010)

Impact of illegal downloading on the film industry

External links â&#x20AC;˘ UK Film Council (http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk|) â&#x20AC;˘ British Video Association (http://www.bva.org.uk/|) â&#x20AC;˘ Alliance Against IP Theft (http://www.allianceagainstiptheft.co.uk/|)

File sharing This article is about file sharing over the Internet. For printer and file sharing as local area network service, see shared disk access. File sharing is the practice of distributing or providing access to digitally stored information, such as computer programs, multimedia (audio, images, and video), documents, or electronic books. It may be implemented through a variety of ways. Storage, transmission, and distribution models are common methods of file sharing that incorporate manual sharing using removable media, centralized computer file server installations on computer networks, World Wide Web-based hyperlinked documents, and the use of distributed peer-to-peer networking (see peer-to-peer file sharing).

Types of file sharing Peer-to-peer file sharing Users can use software that connects in to a peer-to-peer network to search for shared files on the computers of other users (i.e. peers) connected to the network. Files of interest can then be downloaded directly from other users on the network. Typically, large files are broken down into smaller chunks, which may be obtained from multiple peers and then reassembled by the downloader. This is done while the peer is simultaneously uploading the chunks it already has to other peers.

File hosting services File hosting services are a simple alternative to peer-to-peer software. These are sometimes used together with Internet collaboration tools such as email, forums, blogs, or any other medium in which links to direct downloads from file hosting services can be embedded. These sites typically host files so that others can download them.

History Files were first exchanged on removable media. Computers were able to access remote files using filesystem mounting, bulletin board systems (1978), Usenet (1979), and FTP servers (1985). Internet Relay Chat (1988) and Hotline (1997) enabled users to communicate remotely through chat and to exchange files. The mp3 encoding, which was standardized in 1991 and which substantially reduced the size of audio files, grew to widespread use in the late 1990s. In 1998, MP3.com and Audiogalaxy were established, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was unanimously passed, and the first mp3 player devices were launched. MP3.com offered music by unsigned artists, and grew to serve 4 million audio downloads daily. Usenet was created in 1979.[1] It is a network that was initially based on the UUCP protocol for dial-up connections and has, since being transported over the Internet, used a specialized client-server protocol, the Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP). Its main purpose was the exchange of text based messages, but through attachments allowed users to encode files and distribute them to participating subscribers of Usenet newsgroups. Usenet remains one of the largest carriers of file sharing and Internet traffic.[2] [3] Legal challenges to P2P systems have spurred a resurgence of Usenet.[4] Usenet itself has also been the target of legal challenges pertaining to its use in file

File sharing sharing.[5] Between 1979 and the mid 1990s, file sharing was done through bulletin board systems and Usenet. The term shareware and its distribution model became more popular in part due to the BBS networks and systems.[6] Putting shareware on BBS was a way for some developers to distribute their software and generate income.[7] Games such as Doom became popular as a result of this distribution model.[8] Bulletin boards eventually became obsolete as the Internet grew in popularity.[9] In June 1999, Napster was released as a centralized unstructured peer-to-peer system,[10] requiring a central server for indexing and peer discovery. It is generally credited as being the first peer-to-peer file sharing system. In the case of Napster,[11] an online service provider could not use the "transitory network transmission" safe harbor in the DMCA if they had control of the network with a server. Many P2P products will, by their very nature, flunk this requirement, just as Napster did.[12] Napster provided a service where they indexed and stored file information that users of Napster made available on their computers for others to download, and the files were transferred directly between the host and client users after authorization by Napster. Shortly after the A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. loss in court Napster blocked all copyright content from being downloaded. Gnutella, eDonkey2000, and Freenet were released in 2000, as MP3.com and Napster were facing litigation. Gnutella, released in March, was the first decentralized file sharing network. In the gnutella network, all connecting software was considered equal, and therefore the network had no central point of failure. In July, Freenet was released and became the first anonymity network. In September the eDonkey2000 client and server software was released. In 2001, Kazaa and Poisoned for the Mac was released. Its FastTrack network was distributed, though unlike gnutella, it assigned more traffic to 'supernodes' to increase routing efficiency. The network was proprietary and encrypted, and the Kazaa team made substantial efforts to keep other clients such as Morpheus off of the FastTrack network. In July 2001, Napster was sued by several recording companies. As a result, Napster lost in court against these companies and was shut down. This drove users to other P2P applications and file sharing continued its exponential growth.[13] The Audiogalaxy Satellite client grew in popularity, and the LimeWire client and BitTorrent protocol were released. Until its decline in 2004, Kazaa was the most popular file sharing program despite bundled malware and legal battles in the Netherlands, Australia, and the United States. In 2002, a Tokyo district court ruling shut down File Rogue and an RIAA lawsuit effectively shut down Audiogalaxy. From 2002 through 2003, a number of BitTorrent services were established, including Suprnova.org, isoHunt, TorrentSpy, and The Pirate Bay. In 2002, the RIAA was filing lawsuits against Kazaa users. As a result of such lawsuits, many universities added file sharing regulations in their school administrative codes (though some students managed to circumvent them during after school hours). With the shut down of eDonkey in 2005, eMule became the dominant client of the eDonkey network. In 2006, police raids took down the Razorback2 Demonstrators protesting The Pirate Bay raid, eDonkey server and temporarily took down The Pirate Bay. Pro-piracy 2006. demonstrations took place in Sweden in response to the Pirate Bay raid. In 2009, the Pirate Bay trial ended in a guilty verdict for the primary founders of the tracker. The decision was appealed, leading to a second guilty verdict in November 2010[14] Networks such as BitTorrent via uTorrent and Azureus and the trackers & indexing sites, gnutella via Limewire and the eDonkey network via eMule[15] [16] [17] managed to survive this turbulent time. Limewire was forced to shut down following a court order in Arista Records LLC v. Lime Group LLC in October 2010, but the gnutella network remains active through open source clients like Frostwire and gtk-gnutella. Furthermore, multi-protocol file sharing software such as MLDonkey and Shareaza adapted in order to support all the major file sharing protocols, so users

File sharing no longer had to install and configure multiple file sharing programs.

File sharing in academia File sharing occurs in academic and research circles, where researchers wish to access subscription journals and books, but do not wish to pay a licence fee. File-sharing websites allow researchers to request articles, which are then found by those who do have access to them, and then the articles are posted to the website for all to access,[18] a practice that appears to be unknown to many editors of these journals.[19] The file sharing is extended even further by researchers who share library access codes (usernames and passwords) so that other researchers can access the library databases directly themselves.[20]

References [1] From Usenet to CoWebs: interacting with social information spaces, Christopher Lueg, Danyel Fisher, Springer (2003), ISBN 1852335327, ISBN 9781852335328 [2] RFC 3877, Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP), C. Feather, The Internet Society (October 2006) [3] Moskalyuk, Alex (2006-01-01). "European Internet traffic is 19% Usenet, 13% P2P" (http:/ / blogs. zdnet. com/ ITFacts/ ?p=9834). . [4] Computerworlduk.com (http:/ / www. computerworlduk. com/ management/ online/ e-business/ news/ index. cfm?newsid=13443) [5] Arstechnica.com (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ tech-policy/ news/ 2007/ 10/ riaa-shifts-legal-battle-to-a-new-front-sues-usenet-access-provider. ars) [6] Gamasutra.com (http:/ / www. gamasutra. com/ view/ feature/ 4112/ 20_years_of_evolution_scott_. php?page=4) [7] Stang, David J. (1992). Network security (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=KE5EB8QuOh4C& pg=PA235& dq=bbs+ shareware& q=bbs shareware). DIANE Publishing. ISBN 0941375323. . [8] Mäyrä, Frans (2008). An introduction to games studies: games in culture. SAGE. ISBN 1412934451. [9] Wang, Wally (2004). Steal this file sharing book (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=FGfMS5kymmcC& pg=PT23& dq=bbs+ "file+ sharing"& q=bbs "file sharing"). No Starch Press. ISBN 159327050X. . [10] Kenneth P. Birman (2005). Reliable distributed systems (http:/ / books. google. ca/ books?id=KeIENcC2BPwC& pg=PA532& lpg=PA532& dq=napster+ first& source=bl& hl=en& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=2#PPA532,M1), p.532. ISBN 0387215093. [11] Menta, Richard (December 9, 1999). "RIAA Sues Music Startup Napster for $20 Billion" (http:/ / www. mp3newswire. net/ stories/ napster. html). MP3 Newswire. . [12] Fred von Lohmann. v. 5.0, January 2006. "IAAL*: What Peer-to-Peer Developers Need to Know about Copyright Law" (http:/ / w2. eff. org/ IP/ P2P/ p2p_copyright_wp. php), Electronic Frontier Foundation. [13] Menta, Richard (July 20, 2001). "Napster Clones Crush Napster. Take 6 out of the Top 10 Downloads on CNet" (http:/ / www. mp3newswire. net/ stories/ 2001/ topclones. html). MP3 Newswire. . [14] Torrentfreak.com (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ the-pirate-bay-appeal-verdict-101126/ ) [15] Filesharing Report Shows Explosive Growth for uTorrent (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ p2p-statistics-080426/ ) [16] Top P2P Applications: 1.6 Million PCs Rank Them (http:/ / www. mp3newswire. net/ stories/ 8002/ p2p. html) [17] Limewire Gets More Serious About BitTorrent (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ limewire-gets-more-serious-about-bittorrent-090704/ ) [18] Masters, K. (2009). "Opening the non-open access medical journals: Internet-based sharing of journal articles on a medical web site" (http:/ / www. ispub. com/ journal/ the_internet_journal_of_medical_informatics/ volume_5_number_1_52/ article/ opening-the-non-open-access-medical-journals-internet-based-sharing-of-journal-articles-on-a-medical-web-site. html). The Internet Journal of Medical Informatics 5 (1). . [19] Masters, K. (2010). "Articles shared on a medical web site – an international survey of non-open access journal editors" (http:/ / www. ispub. com/ journal/ the_internet_journal_of_medical_informatics/ volume_5_number_2_51/ article/ articles-shared-on-a-medical-web-site-an-international-survey-of-non-open-access-journal-editors. html). The Internet Journal of Medical Informatics 5 (2). . [20] Masters, K. (2010). "Opening the closed-access medical journals: Internet-based sharing of institutions’ access codes on a medical web-site" (http:/ / www. ispub. com/ journal/ the_internet_journal_of_medical_informatics/ volume_5_number_2_51/ article/ opening-the-closed-access-medical-journals-internet-based-sharing-of-institutions-access-codes-on-a-medical-web-site. html). The Internet Journal of Medical Informatics 5 (2). .

File sharing

Further reading • Ghosemajumder, Shuman. Advanced Peer-Based Technology Business Models (http://shumans.com/ p2p-business-models.pdf). MIT Sloan School of Management, 2002. • Steve Kelly. File Sharing in Vista? (http://www.networkmagic.com/advice/article/ sharing-files-and-printers-with-vista.php) • Silverthorne, Sean. Music Downloads: Pirates- or Customers? (http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4206& t=innovation). Harvard Business School Working Knowledge, 2004. • Ralf Steinmetz, Klaus Wehrle (Eds). Peer-to-Peer Systems and Applications (http://www.peer-to-peer.info/). ISBN 3-540-29192-X, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 3485, September 2005 • Stephanos Androutsellis-Theotokis and Diomidis Spinellis. A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies (http://www.spinellis.gr/pubs/jrnl/2004-ACMCS-p2p/html/AS04.html). ACM Computing Surveys, 36(4):335–371, December 2004. doi:10.1145/1041680.1041681 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/ 1041680.1041681). • Stefan Saroiu, P. Krishna Gummadi, and Steven D. Gribble. A Measurement Study of Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Systems (http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~almeroth/classes/F02.276/papers/p2p-measure.pdf). Technical Report # UW-CSE-01-06-02. Department of Computer Science & Engineering. University of Washington. Seattle, WA, USA. • Selected Papers (http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/labs/danss/p2p/resources.html) — A collection of academic papers.

External links • Digital Britain (http://interactive.bis.gov.uk/digitalbritain/digital-economy-bill/.) • File storage web applications (http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/On_the_Web/Web_Applications/ Storage//) at the Open Directory Project

Metallica v. Napster, Inc.

Metallica v. Napster, Inc. Metallica v. Napster, Inc.

Court

United States District Court for the Northern District of California

Full case name Metallica v. Napster, Inc. Judge(s) sitting Marilyn Hall Patel

Metallica, et al. v. Napster, Inc. was a 2000 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California case that focused on copyright infringement, racketeering, and unlawful use of digital audio interface devices. Metallica vs. Napster, Inc. was the first case that involved an artist suing a peer-to-peer file sharing ("P2P") software company.

Background Metallica is a heavy metal band from Los Angeles, California, that was formed in 1981. Napster was a pioneering peer-to-peer file sharing Internet service, founded by Shawn Fanning, that emphasized sharing digitally encoded music as MP3 audio files. On April 13, 2000, Metallica filed a lawsuit against the file sharing company Napster. Metallica alleged that Napster was guilty of copyright infringement, racketeering, and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.[1] The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. This case was filed soon after another case was filed against Napster, the A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., which included 18 large record companies.[2] Metallica v. Napster, Inc. was the first instance of an artist suing a P2P software company. This case encouraged several other high profile artists to sue Napster.[3]

Case specifics On July 11, 2000 Lars Ulrich read a testimony to the Judiciary committee accusing Napster of copyright infringement. In the testimony it is explained that in 2000, Metallica discovered that a demo of the song "I Disappear", which was set to be released with the "Mission: Impossible II" soundtrack, was being played on the radio. Metallica was able to trace the source of the leak back to a file on Napster's peer-to-peer file-sharing network. It was also discovered that the bands entire catalogue was available for free download.[4] Metallica argued that Napster was enabling users to exchange copyrighted MP3 files.[5] Metallica sought a minimum of $10 million dollars in damages, at a rate of $100,000 per song that was illegally downloaded.[6] Metallica hired NetPD, an online consulting firm, to monitor the Napster service. NetPD produced a list of 335,435 Napster users who were allegedly sharing the band's songs online in violation of copyright laws. The 60,000 page list was delivered to Napster's office.[7] Metallica demanded that all of their songs be banned from file sharing, and that the users responsible for sharing their music also be banned from the service. This lead to over 300,000 users being banned from Napster.[8] The suit also named several universities to be held accountable for allowing students to illegally download music on their networks. These universities included University of Southern California, Yale University, and Indiana University.[9]

Metallica v. Napster, Inc.

Outcome In March 2001, the federal district court judge ruling over the case, Marilyn Hall Patel, issued a preliminary injunction in Metallica's favor pending the case's resolution. The injunction, which was substantially identical to one ordered in the A&M case, ordered Napster to place a filter on the program within 72 hours or be shut down.[10] Napster was forced to search through its system and remove all copyrighted songs by Metallica.[11] Dr. Dre and several of his fellow artists, a number of record companies, and the RIAA subsequently filed lawsuits of their own which led to the termination of an additional 230,142 Napster accounts.[12] On July 12, 2001 Napster reached a settlement with Metallica and Dr. Dre after Bertelsmann AG BMG became interested in purchasing the rights to Napster for $94 million. The settlement required that Napster block all of the music being shared from any artist that did not want their music to be shared.[13] This deal was blocked due to Judge Peter Walsh's rule that the $94 million deal was tainted because Napster Chief Executive Officer Konrad Hilbers, a former Bertelsmann executive, had one foot in the Napster camp and one foot in the Bertelsmann camp. Napster was then forced to file for Chapter 7 and liquefy its assets.[14]

Napster The Napster program was originally a way for nineteen-year-old Shawn Fanning and his close friends throughout the country to trade music in the MP3 format. Fanning and his friends decided to try and increase the number of files available and involve more people by creating a way for users to browse each other’s files and to talk to each other. As a result, Napster went live in September 1999 and gained instant popularity. Napster’s number of registered users was doubling every 5–6 weeks. From its debut, Napster managed to draw more new users than any other online application in history. In February 2001, Napster had roughly 80 million monthly users compared to Yahoo’s 54 million monthly users. At its peak Napster facilitated nearly 2 billion file transfers per month and had an estimated net-worth of between 60-80 million dollars. Fanning designed Napster as a searching and indexing program, meaning that files weren’t actually downloaded from Napster’s servers but rather from a peer’s computer. Users had to download a program called MusicShare which would allow them to interact with Napster’s servers. When users would log onto their Napster account, MusicShare would read the names of the MP3 files that the user had made public and would then communicate with Napster’s servers so a complete list of all public files from all users could be compiled. Once logged into Napster a user would simply enter the name of the file they wanted to download and hit the search button to view a list of all the sources that contained the desired file. The user would then click the download button and the Napster server would communicate with the host's MusicShare browser to facilitate a connection and begin the download. This method of file sharing is referred to as peer-to-peer file sharing.[15]

P2P Peer-to-peer is a distributed application architecture that partitions tasks or workloads between cooperating users. By joining one of these peer-to-peer network of nodes, the users allow a portion of their resources, such as processing power, disk storage or network bandwidth, to be directly available to other network participants. By utilizing this type of application structure, any MP3s, videos, or other files located on a users' computer are instantly made available to other Napster users for download. This is one of the major reasons Napster was so popular, it was easy to use and had a large number of files for download. Being one of the first of its kind, Napster made a significant contribution to the popularity of the peer-to-peer application structure. Many other software applications followed in Napster's footsteps by using this model including BearShare, Gnutella, Freenet, and today's major application of torrents including BitTorrent.

Metallica v. Napster, Inc.

Issues surrounding P2P software One of the largest issues with P2P software is the public assumption that users' use these programs strictly for illegally pirating copyrighted files. There are many other issues associated with P2P software. Some file sharing clients have been known to release confidential personal information,[16] and come bundled with spyware, malware, or other viruses that could enable unsecure, unsigned codes to allow remote access to any file on the user's computer.[17] [18]

Artists using P2P for promotion The relationship between music artists and P2P file sharing software is not always about pirating music. In several studies, it has been proven that users of Napster who download free music actually spend more money on music.[19] By downloading free music, users are able to sample new music, artists, and find new tastes, which leads to increased sales.[20] Several artists also supported Napster and used the service for promotion. In 2000, Limp Bizkit signed a $1.8 million deal to promote 23 free concerts.[21]

Implications There were many people that were worried that the ruling in the Napster v. Metallica case would affect the future of P2P file sharing and other industries that stemmed from the growing popularity of MP3 music.[22] In RIAA v. Diamond, the Recording Industry Association of America sued Diamond Multimedia Systems for producing a portable MP3 player called the Rio. The RIAA claimed that the Rio did not comply with the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA), and thus its production should be halted. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Rio was not covered by the AHRA and that it was designed simply to enable users to easily listen to MP3 files that were already stored on their personal computers or on other personal storage devices. In the earlier case of Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., it was ruled that Sony's VCR, which allowed users to record live television onto cassette tapes to be viewed at a later time, did not violate copyright law.[23]

References [1] Jones, Christopher. "Metallica Rips Napster" (http:/ / www. wired. com/ politics/ law/ news/ 2000/ 04/ 35670). . Retrieved 27 April 2011. [2] A & M RECORDS, INC. v. Napster, Inc., 114 F. Supp. 2d 896 - Dist. Court, ND (http:/ / scholar. google. com/ scholar_case?case=11742536547701554911& q=metallica+ lawsuit& hl=en& as_sdt=2,23). 2000. . Retrieved 28 April 2011. [3] Borland, John. "Napster boots Dr. Dre fans from service" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ 2100-1023-241159. html). . Retrieved 27 April 2011. [4] "Lars Ulrich Testimony" (http:/ / classic-web. archive. org/ web/ 20071129061341/ http:/ / judiciary. senate. gov/ testimony. cfm?id=195& wit_id=252). . Retrieved 23 April 2011. [5] Marshall L. (2002, April 5) Metallica and Morality: The Rhetorical Battleground of the Napster Wars. Pg. 8 [6] Borland, John. "Napster, universities sued by Metallica - CNET News" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ 2100-1023-239263. html). News.cnet.com. . Retrieved 2011-04-23. [7] Borland, John. "Metallica fingers 335,435 Napster users" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ Metallica-fingers-335,435-Napster-users/ 2100-1023_3-239956. html). . Retrieved 23 April 2011. [8] "Napster timeline - PC World Business" (http:/ / www. pcworld. idg. com. au/ article/ 47976/ napster_timeline/ ). Pcworld.idg.com.au. 2001-04-03. . Retrieved 2011-04-23. [9] "Metallica Sues Napster, 3 Universities" (http:/ / www. billboard. com/ news/ metallica-sues-napster-3-universities-866918. story#/ news/ metallica-sues-napster-3-universities-866918. story). . Retrieved 25 April 2011. [10] Sakuma, Paul. "The End of the Line for Royalties?" (http:/ / www. time. com/ time/ nation/ article/ 0,8599,101597,00. html). . Retrieved 29 April 2011. [11] "Metallica vs. Napster, Inc Case" (http:/ / www. findlaw. com). FindLaw.com: 2. 2000. . Retrieved 25 April 2011. [12] Borland, John. "Napster Boots Dr. Dre Fans From Service" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ 2100-1023-241159. html). . Retrieved 28 April 2011. [13] "Napster settles suits" (http:/ / money. cnn. com/ 2001/ 07/ 12/ news/ napster/ ). . Retrieved 29 April 2011. [14] Evangelista, Benny. "Napster runs out of lives -- judge rules against sale" (http:/ / www. sfgate. com/ cgi-bin/ article. cgi?file=/ chronicle/ archive/ 2002/ 09/ 04/ BU138263. DTL). . Retrieved 29 April 2011. [15] Green, Matthew (2002). "Napster Opens Pandoraâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Box: Examining How File-Sharing Services Threaten the Enforcement of Copyright on the Internet". Ohio State Law Journal 63 (799).

Metallica v. Napster, Inc. [16] Vijayan, Jaikumar. "P2P networks a treasure trove of leaked health care data, study finds" (http:/ / www. computerworld. com/ s/ article/ 9176883/ P2P_networks_a_treasure_trove_of_leaked_health_care_data_study_finds?source=CTWNLE_nlt_pm_2010-05-17). . Retrieved 27 April 2011. [17] Johnson, Eric; Dan McGuire, Nicholas D. Willey (2008). "The Evolution of the Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Industry and the Security Risks for Users" (http:/ / csdl2. computer. org/ comp/ proceedings/ hicss/ 2008/ 3075/ 00/ 30750383. pdf). Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences: 7. . Retrieved 27 April 2011. [18] Håvard, Vegge; Halvorsen Finn Michael, Nergård Rune Walsø, Jaatun Martin Gilje, Jensen Jostein (24-28). Fourth International Conference on Internet Monitoring and Protection. [19] Hansen, Evan. "Study: Napster users buy more music" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ 2100-1023-243463. html). . Retrieved 28 April 2011. [20] Peitz, Martin; Patrick Waelbroeck (2006). "Why the music industry may gain from free downloading — The role of sampling". International Journal of Industrial Organization: 908. [21] "Embattled Napster Sponsors Bizkit Giveaway" (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=03sgkLDeZVcC& pg=PA6& lpg=PA6& dq=universities+ named+ in+ napster+ case& source=bl& ots=jQ4CQfZIfT& sig=kq_-bUtJhVnFwud7dOyrG0svAUc& hl=en& ei=1aK1Ta67PMLv0gGTrK2wBQ& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=5& ved=0CDUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage& q& f=false). CMJ New Music Report 62 (665): 6. 8. . Retrieved 28 April 2011. [22] Green, Matthew (2002). "Napster Opens Pandora's Box: Examining How File-Sharing Services Threaten the Enforcement of Copyright on the Internet". Ohio State Law Journal 63 (799). [23] Burgunder, Lee (June 2002). "Reflections On Napster: The Ninth Circuit Takes A Walk On The Wild Side". American Business Law Journal 39 (4): 683–710.

The Pirate Bay trial

The Pirate Bay trial The Pirate Bay Trial

Protesters showing support for The Pirate Bay on the first day of the trial. Court

District court (tingsrätt) of Stockholm, Sweden

Full case name

B 13301-06

Date decided

17 April 2009

Judge(s) sitting

Tomas Norström

The Pirate Bay trial was a joint criminal and civil prosecution in Sweden of four individuals charged for promoting the copyright infringement of others with the torrent tracking website The Pirate Bay.[1] [2] The criminal charges were supported by a consortium of intellectual rights holders led by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), who filed individual civil compensation claims against the owners of The Pirate Bay.[3] Swedish prosecutors filed charges on 31 January 2008 against Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm, and Peter Sunde, who ran the site; and Carl Peter Sunde, Gottfrid Svartholm, Rick Falkvinge Lundström, a Swedish businessman who through his businesses sold and Marcin de Kaminski at the demonstration by the court house on the first day of the trial services to the site. The prosecutor claimed the four worked together to administer, host, and develop the site and thereby facilitated other people's breach of copyright law. Some 34 cases of copyright infringements were originally listed, of which 21 were related to music files, 9 to movies, and 4 to games.[2] One case involving music files was later dropped by the copyright holder who made the file available again on the website of The Pirate Bay. In addition, claims for damages of 117 million kronor (US$13 million) were filed.[4] The case was decided jointly by a judge and three appointed laymen.[5] [6] The trial started on 16 February 2009 in the district court (tingsrätt) of Stockholm, Sweden. The hearings ended on 3 March 2009 and the verdict was announced at 11:00 AM on Friday 17 April 2009: Peter Sunde, Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm and Carl Lundström were all found guilty and sentenced to serve one year in prison and pay a fine of 30 million SEK (about €2.7 million or US$3.5 million).[7] All the defendants appealed the verdict, and in November 2010 the appeal court shortened the prison sentences, but increased damages. The verdict was again appealed, and the Supreme Court is expected to give a response during 2011.

The Pirate Bay The Pirate Bay is a Swedish website that indexes and tracks BitTorrent files. It bills itself as "the world's largest BitTorrent tracker"[8] and is ranked as the 85th most popular website by Alexa Internet.[9] The website is funded primarily with advertisements shown next to torrent listings. Initially established in November 2003 by the Swedish anti-copyright organization Piratbyrån ("The Piracy Bureau") it has been operating as a separate organization since October 2004. The website is currently run by Gottfrid Svartholm ("anakata") and Fredrik Neij ("TiAMO"). Peter Sunde ("brokep") is the site spokesperson.[10]

The Pirate Bay trial

Police raid on The Pirate Bay On 31 May 2006 the Swedish police organized a raid on The Pirate Bay in 12 different premises,[11] confiscating 186 servers[12] [13] and causing it to go offline for three days. Upon reopening, the site's number of visitors more than doubled,[14] the increased popularity attributed to greater exposure through the media coverage. The raid, alleged by The Pirate Bay to be politically motivated and under pressure from the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA),[15] was reported as a success by the MPAA in the immediate aftermath but with the website being restored within days and file sharing now firmly in focus in the Swedish media, The Pirate Bay considered the raid "highly unsuccessful" for the site's operation.[16]

Swedish protesting the police raid during a demonstration on June 3, 2006

The police however conducted a preliminary investigation on the confiscated material and by interrogating associated people. In late 2007 a four thousand page report was produced by the prosecutor in preparation for a trial,[17] containing email and SMS messages, payment documents, police interrogation records, and screenshots of The Pirate Bay site.[18] [19]

Trial and courtroom charges On 31 January 2008 Swedish prosecutors filed charges against four individuals they associated with The Pirate Bay for "promoting other people's infringements of copyright laws".[1] [2] One of the artists represented by IFPI, Max Peezay, withdrew from the case, decreasing his distributor's compensation demand by 120 000 SEK. Peezay hadn't been asked about participating in the case, and he in fact supports file sharing for private use.[20] Peezay noted however that being unfamiliar with the site, his withdrawal shouldn't be interpreted as a sign of support for their case.[21] The trial began in February 2009. The evidence used in the trial was based on the material acquired in the 2006 raid.[11] The Swedish national television broadcaster Sveriges Television considers the trial important[22] and provides a live online feed of the entire trial,[23] which has never been done in Sweden before.[24] The live audio and archive sections done in cooperation with Dagens Eko are part of the 24 Direkt program, which became one of their most viewed online content during the trial, second only to Melodifestivalen.[25] The trial was also broadcast live by Swedish public radio.[26] The defendants referred to the trial as a "Spectrial", which is a portmanteau of "trial" and "spectacle",[27] [28] and set up a blog to inform users on the event.[29] The term has also caught on with some bloggers and supporters.[30]

First day of the trial On 16 February 2009 defense lawyer Per E. Samuelson stressed to the court that "file sharing services can be used both legally and illegally". Samuelson argued that "it is legal to offer a service that can be used in both a legal and illegal way according to Swedish law" and that The Pirate Bay's services "can be compared to making cars that can be driven faster than the speed limit". Defense attorney Jonas Nilsson insisted that "the individual Internet users who use Pirate Bay services... must answer for the material they have in their possession or the files they plan to share with others."[31]

The Pirate Bay trial

Second day of the trial – charges partially dropped On 17 February 2009 (the second day of the trial) half of the charges against The Pirate Bay were dropped.[32] According to defense lawyer Per Samuelson, "This is a sensation. It is very rare to win half the case in just one and a half days and it is clear the prosecutor took strong note of what we said yesterday". Peter Danowsky, legal counsel for the music companies, stated "It's a largely technical issue that changes nothing in terms of our compensation claims and has no bearing whatsoever on the main case against The Pirate Bay. In fact it simplifies the prosecutor’s case by allowing him to focus on the main issue which is the making available of copyrighted works."[33] The prosecutor was unable to prove the .torrent files brought as evidence were actually using The Pirate Bay's tracker. Furthermore, prosecutor Håkan Roswall did not adequately explain the function of DHT which allows for so-called "trackerless" torrents. These shortcomings in the evidence resulted in prosecutor Håkan Roswall having to drop all charges relating to "assisting copyright infringement", leaving "assisting making available" as the remaining charge. Roswall stated that "everything related to reproduction will be removed from the claim".[34] Sanna Wolk, a doctor in law and researcher at Stockholm University observed that "this is not surprising, at least for those who follow the matter. We knew that The Pirate Bay wasn't making any copies directly".[4]

Third day of the trial On the third day of The Pirate Bay trial, prosecution witnesses claimed damages on the basis that it should have obtained worldwide licenses for the content it distributed. Where content wasn't officially available, a Beatles song, for example, it should be charged at 10 times the going rate. This calculation underlines the prosecution's demand for 117 million SEK (US$12.9 million, €10.2 million) in compensation and damages.[35] "King Kong" defense On day three of the trial, defense attorney Per Samuelson presented an argument later dubbed the "King Kong defense":[36] EU directive 2000/31/EC[37] says that he who provides an information service is not responsible for the information that is being transferred. In order to be responsible, the service provider must initiate the transfer. But the admins of The Pirate Bay don’t initiate transfers. It’s the users that do and they are physically identifiable people. They call themselves names like King Kong... According to legal procedure, the accusations must be against an individual and there must be a close tie between the perpetrators of a crime and those who are assisting. This tie has not been shown. The prosecutor must show that Carl Lundström personally has interacted with the user King Kong, who may very well be found in the jungles of Cambodia...[38] Samuelson is referring to a real Pirate Bay user who posts via the username "King Kong", who Samuelson hypothesizes could be in Cambodia. He used this scenario to illustrate that Lundström had no control over the actions undertaken by Pirate Bay users. His main objection was that although the prosecutor had said that the accused would be tried individually, he had not once referred to them individually, but always as "them", "they" or "Pirate Bay". Samuelson said the persons behind The Pirate Bay could not be held collectively responsible for a crime committed by other identifiable individuals, such as King Kong.[39] The term "King Kong defense" was quickly popularized by blogs, file sharing news feeds, and media reports on the Pirate Bay trial.[40] It has been compared to the Chewbacca defense from the TV series South Park, citing a reference to the "jungles of Cambodia" as "the kind of extraneous detail that makes the Chewbacca defense hilarious".[41] In its April verdict the court found that because the defendants indeed had collective responsibility of the site and knew that some torrent files on it point to copyrighted material, the EU directive does not apply.[10]

The Pirate Bay trial

Fourth day of the trial On 19 February 2009, the fourth day of the trial, Fredrik was questioned several times. It came to the court’s attention that Tobias Andersson, a future witness in the case, was in the court where he was later asked to leave the room. When it was movie industry lawyer Monique Wadsted’s turn, she introduced new evidence without warning. Noting the breach of protocol, the judge asked if it was acceptable for the court to be considering evidence that was not already presented pre-trial.[42]

Fifth day of the trial Day five of the proceedings saw conflict as the prosecution again attempted to introduce evidence that had not been shared with both the court and the defense during pre-trial. The defense objected vehemently with defense lawyer Peter Althin equating the tactic to something out of the old Perry Mason TV show. “Suddenly, the door opens and in walks an entirely new witness.” The judge stopped the case to deliberate the matter and found in favor of the defense, instructing the prosecution to immediately hand over all material they planned to use.[43] The prosecution and the defense spent the remainder of the day delivering conflicting portrayals of the Pirate Bay. The prosecution attempted to show the Pirate Bay as an immensely profitable business that made its money helping others violate copyright law. The defense attempted to show the Pirate Bay as nothing more than a search engine, no different from Google and thus subject to the same protections.

Seventh, eighth and ninth days of the trial On days seven to nine, the court heard expert witnesses called by the prosecution and the defense.[44] They cited contradicting academic research on the effects of file sharing on sales in the music and film industry globally[45] and regionally in Sweden.[46]

Verdict and reactions The four operators of the site were convicted by Stockholm district court on 17 April 2009 and sentenced to one year in jail each and a total of 30 million Swedish kronor (approximately US$3.5 million, €2.7 million) in fines and damages. The court found that the defendants were all guilty of accessory to crime against copyright law, strengthened by the commercial and organized nature of the activity.[47] The court, however, never presented its corpus delicti (that is, it never attempted to prove that a crime was committed, but it succeeded in proving that someone was an accessory to that crime). Prosecutor Håkan Roswall cited in his closing arguments a Supreme Court of Sweden opinion that a person holding the jacket of someone committing battery can be held responsible for the battery.[48] [49] In its verdict the court stated that "responsibility for assistance can strike someone who has only insignificantly assisted in the principal crime",[10] referring to a Supreme Court precedent where an accountant was sentenced for accessory to crime even though his actions were not criminal per se.[50] The court rejected the charge of preparation to crime against copyright law. The lawyers of all four defendants appealed the verdict,[51] with Lundström's lawyers already on the day it was given.[52] The entertainment industry lawyers appealed as well, on reintroducing the dismissed charge and on the method of calculating damages, which in their opinion does not fully cover the lost income.[53]

The Pirate Bay trial

Company

Nationality

Type of Industry

Compensation for damages (SEK) Costs of litigation (SEK)

20th Century Fox

Motion Picture

10,867,460 ($1,285,354.91)

333,500 ($39,444.89)

Mars Media

Motion Picture

4,450,991 ($526,443.45)

333,500 ($39,444.89)

Columbia Pictures

Motion Picture

4,184,444 ($494,917.45)

333,500 ($39,444.89)

Yellow Bird

Motion Picture

3,150,000 ($372,568.01)

484,920 ($57,354.18)

Warner Bros

Motion Picture

2,898,225 ($342,789.18)

592,000 ($70,019.13)

EMI Music Sweden

Music

1,798,975 ($212,774.77)

264,000 ($31,224.74)

Warner Music Sweden

Music

1,616,759 ($191,223.07)

54,000 ($6,386.88)

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer

Motion Picture

1,394,831 ($372,568.01)

Universal Music

Music

814,339 ($96,316.40)

156,000 ($18,450.98)

Sony Music Entertainment Sweden

Music

457,675 ($54,131.76)

468,000 ($55,352.96)

Playground Music

Music

310,794 ($36,759.33)

156,000 ($18,450.98)

Nordisk Film

Motion Picture

225,000 ($26,612.00)

53,880 ($6,372.68)

Bonnier Amigo Music Group

Music

47,349 ($5,600.22)

102,000 ($12,064.10)

Blizzard Entertainment

Video games

25,000 ($2,956.88)

Activision

Video games

12,500 ($1,478.44)

Total:

[54]

32,216,842

($3,810,465.01)

3,368,800 ($398,446.70)

File sharing researcher Daniel Johansson called the ruling the most important file sharing related verdict in Europe so far, comparing it to the Napster verdict in the US.[55] The sentence is the longest ever awarded under Swedish copyright law,[56] and the prison time and damage compensation high by Swedish standards.[57] While most legal experts expected the court to find the defendants guilty,[58] they were surprised at the harsh verdict.[59] [60] Sociology of law professor H책kan Hyden criticised the exceptionally harsh sentence on both the prison time and large amount of compensation awarded,[61] and some legal analysts expect the punishments to be radically lowered in higher courts.[62] The international public following the trial received the verdict with varying opinions. Some high-profile copyright holders publicly defended the verdict, with former Beatles vocalist Paul McCartney commenting to the BBC that "if you get on a bus, you've got to pay. And I think it's fair, you should pay for your ticket."[63] Mark Mulligan from Forrester Research considered the verdict very important for music industry PR,[64] and copyright holder organisations indeed praised it as a landmark verdict.[65] [66] Likewise, The European Association of Internet Service Providers welcomed the verdict, commending judicial resolution to copyright infringement issues over internet filtering or three strikes policies.[67] The Economist went further by criticising that the sentence might not have been strong enough to act as a deterrent for setting up similar services in the future.[68] Some copyright holders took a different view however: Snow Patrol vocalist Gary Lightbody commented in interview that "they shouldn't have been jailed... the punishment doesn't fit the crime."[69] In a column in Dagens Nyheter, composer and professor Roger Wallis, who was involved in the trial, condemned the verdict and its effects as paralyzing Swedish IT innovation on new ways of doing business.[70] At the end of May 2009, Swedish Minister for Culture Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth made a speech to The Swedish Society of Popular Music Composers, expressing her opinion that "I was among those pleased about the Pirate Bay verdict."[71] In accordance with the ministerstyre in the Constitution of Sweden, it is unconstitutional for ministers to influence ongoing cases, and many political commentators criticised the minister's statement. Max Andersson, member of the Committee on the Constitution in the Parliament of Sweden, requested the committee to review the incident.[72] The committee pointed out the independence of judicial bodies and the government, and reminded

The Pirate Bay trial ministers to exercise caution in their statements, but saw no need for further action or comment.[73]

Subsequent events Over 25,000 people joined the Swedish Pirate Party in the ten days following the guilty verdict,[74] raising its membership to over 40,000 members and making it the fourth-largest Swedish party by membership count at the time, and the party with the largest youth organisation.[75] In Stockholm and other cities, the Pirate Party organized protests against the court's verdict. Over 1000 protesters gathered in the streets of Stockholm the following day.[76] [77] Protest leader Malin Littorin-Ferm said "we young people have a whole platform on the Internet, where we have all our social contacts -- it is there that we live. The state is trying to control the Internet and, by extension, our private lives".[78] Pirate Party Chairman Rickard Falkvinge claimed at the protests that "the establishment and the politicians have declared war against our whole generation,"[79] Following the conviction, the IFPI demanded that Swedish internet service providers block The Pirate Bay, but the ISPs have refused to do this.[80] Jon Karlung, managing director of Bahnhof, stated that "we will not censor sites for our customers; that is not our job. I am against anything that contradicts the principle of a free and open Internet." Several Swedish file sharing sites have closed voluntarily with The Pirate Bay verdict as a deterrent and as a result of further police investigation.[81] On April 20, 2009, Anonymous mobilized "Operation Baylout", which included a DDoS attack on the IFPI International website, causing the site to go offline for a few hours. They released a statement asking supporters of file-sharing to refrain from making any industry-related media purchases during the months of April and May.[82] [83] Two artists originally mentioned in the indictment, Advance Patrol and Max Peezay, later went on to release their work on The Pirate Bay in spring 2009.[84] [85]

Bias allegations In mid 2008 after the indictment had been served, it was discovered that the main police investigator in the preliminary investigation had started working for one of the plaintiffs, Warner Brothers, before the date of the indictment. Sunde's lawyer Peter Althin questioned the neutrality and reliability of the preliminary investigation in the event that the investigator had entered the new employment during the investigation, and suspected the job might have been a reward for good work in The Pirate Bay investigation.[86] Althin believed that the investigation might have to be redone if that was the case.[87] The prosecutor Håkan Roswall responded that it wouldn't have posed problems for the investigation because the police were working under his directive, and the investigator's superior officer brushed off the incident as nothing remarkable. Warner Brothers commented merely that the investigator hadn't received any compensation during the time he worked for the Swedish police.[88] According to Roswall, this type of concurrent employment would not be an individual incident, but that the decision of possible bias would be for the court to decide, and that the investigator is not a key witness in the case.[86] [89] The investigator could not be reached during the trial and was taken off the witness list.[90] [91] [92] Only days before the trial began, one of the three appointed laymen was discovered to be a member of a composers' association that among others works on protecting copyright.[93] After discussing with judge Tomas Norström the problem the membership could pose to the trial, the composer recused himself from acting as a lay judge in the case and he was replaced with another.[94] [95] In the aftermath of the trial, presiding judge Tomas Norström, the same judge that ordered the 2006 raid on The Pirate Bay's servers, came under scrutiny after allegations of bias. Sveriges Radio P3 News organized an investigation that found on April 23 that Norström had several engagements with organisations interested in intellectual property issues. Peter Danowsky, Monique Wadsted and Henrik Pontén from the prosecution side are also members of one of the organisations, the Swedish Copyright Association (SFU).[96] Wadsted commented that all intellectual property lawyers in Stockholm are part of the association.[97] According to Norström, the

The Pirate Bay trial

organisations are involved in discussion about copyright, while the earlier layman's organisation advocates further copyright protection.[98] Norström however also sits in the board of the Swedish Association for the Protection of Industrial Property,[96] which along with the SFU are the Swedish branches of International Association for the Protection of Industrial Property (AIPPI) and Association littéraire et artistique internationale (ALAI). AIPPI's website states that "the objective of AIPPI is to improve and promote the protection of intellectual property on both an international and national basis", and ALAI's president Victor Nabhan commented that his organisation is dedicated mostly to defending copyright holders' interests.[99] Several legal experts have commented that the judge should not have taken the case because of the potential conflict of interest or should at least have mentioned it in the beginning of the trial, and that there are grounds for a retrial.[96] [100] [101] The district court itself however defended judges' membership in these types of organisations.[102] Following the discovery on April 23, Peter Sunde's lawyer Peter Althin announced that he would request for a retrial.[96] The Swedish Parliamentary Ombudsman decided not to investigate the bias since the question had already been requested to be taken up in the Svea Court of Appeal.[103] The court of appeal received the case on May 18 and assigned it to judge Ulrika Ihrfelt. On the question of bias, Ihrfelt stated she was a member of the Swedish Copyright Association in 2005 when working in the supreme court, but didn't consider herself biased because of this.[104] The president of the court was requested to reassign the case,[105] and on May 20 it was reassigned to three judges from another court of appeal department. The district court along with the prosecutor formally defended judges' memberships in these types of organisations as a way to gain knowledge on copyright issues.[102] [106] The court of appeal considered it a priority case,[107] and ruled on June 25 that the judge's memberships do not constitute bias and that there would be no retrial in the district court.[108] [109] During the preparation for the appeal trial, bias allegations were also made on the court of appeal. In Swedish appeal proceedings for criminal cases where the sentence is greater than a fine, the court usually consists of three jurist judges and two laymen.[110] Judge Ihrfelt, again appointed to the case, informed the parties in mid September 2009 that one of the appointed laymen is working for the music streaming service Spotify, which is partly owned by record companies.[111] The layman himself didn't feel biased because of his work,[112] but prosecuting attorney Danowsky commented that anyone both judging the case and working for Spotify has a conflict of interest.[113] Later on the same week, defense attorney Samuelsson submitted allegations to the appeal court of Ihrfelt and another jurist judge being biased for their membership in the same interest groups judge Norström was investigated for.[114] In the court's opinion, the judges' memberships did not constitute bias, whereas the layman's impartiality was questionable and he was dismissed.[115] [116] The court's decision was appealed, and in May 2010 the supreme court affirmed the appeal court's decision on the bias question.[117] [118] [119]

Parties Defendants

Fredrik Neij

Gottfrid Svartholm

Peter Sunde

Carl Lundström

The Pirate Bay trial

Plaintiffs The criminal charges against The Pirate Bay are directly supported by the following prosecution witnesses:[120] • IFPI representing: • Sony BMG Music Entertainment Sweden AB • Universal Music AB • Playground Music Scandinavia AB • Bonnier Amigo Music Group AB • EMI Music Sweden AB • Warner Bros. Music Sweden AB • Antipiratbyrån representing: • Yellow Bird Films AB • Nordisk Film • Henrik Danstrup • MAQS Law Firm Advokatbyrå KB[121] representing: • Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc • MGM Pictures Inc • • • • • •

Columbia Pictures Industries Inc 20th Century Fox Films Co Mars Media Beteiligungs GmbH & Co Filmproduktions Blizzard Entertainment Inc Sierra Entertainment Inc Activision Publishing Inc

Feature films included in the case • Kurt Wallander:

• • • •

• Wallander - Den svaga punkten • Wallander - Afrikanen • Wallander – Mastermind Pusher III Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire The Pink Panther Walk the Line

Television dramas included in the case • Prison Break (first season) episodes 1 to 13. Personal computer games included in the case • • • •

Call of Duty 2 Diablo II F.E.A.R. World of Warcraft

The Pirate Bay trial

Appeal After sentencing, the defendants decided to appeal the verdict of the first trial. The appeal started on September 28, 2010 and concluded on October 15, 2010.[122] On November 26, 2010, the verdict was announced. In the verdict, the court found that “The Pirate Bay has facilitated illegal file sharing in a way that results in criminal liability for those who run the service.” [123] Under the verdict, the sentences of three of the defendants would be reduced and the total fines would be increased. The fourth defendant, Gottfrid Svartholm, was not present at the time due to medical reasons. He will have a separate trial at a later date. The sentence from the appeal traded jail time for increased fines. After the initial trial, each defendant was to serve a year of jail time and pay fines just under 1 million dollars each.[124] After the trial, Fredrik Neij was sentenced to 10 months, Peter Sunde to 8 months, and Carl Lundstrom to 4 months in prison.[125] With the sentence came an increase in the total fines. The Svea Court of Appeal decided to grant all Nordic companies their full request in compensation for copyright infringement due to The Pirate Bay, with outside companies being granted smaller gains in compensation. The total fine for the three defendants was increased from 32 million Kronor to 46 million Kronor (US$6.5 million) [123] Each defendant was issued different sentences because of individual contribution toward facilitating illegal file sharing. Instead of issuing all defendants the same sentence, they were each judged on their contribution and sentenced accordingly.[124] However, the fine is to be paid by the three defendants present at the sentencing.[123] The verdict was appealed to the Supreme Court.[126]

Events during the trial Support campaign On 18 February 2009 the Norwegian socialist party Red began a global campaign in support of The Pirate Bay and filesharers worldwide that lasted until 1 May. The campaign was timed to coincide with the trial.[127] Through the website filesharer.org individuals were encouraged to upload their photographs, as "mugshots", to "let the music and movie industry know who the file-sharers are." The site encourages participation urging people to "Upload a picture of yourself and show them what a criminal looks like!". Red politician Elin Volder Rutle is the initiator of the campaign and she states to the media that "If the guys behind Pirate Bay are criminals, then so am I, and so are most other Norwegians."[128]

IFPI website hack The website of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) was hacked and defaced with a message to Håkan Roswall, the prosecutor in the trial. The website subsequently became inaccessible, possibly owing to a denial-of-service attack. It was shortly brought back online. Peter Sunde, one of the defendants, responded to news of the attack with the comment "Our case is going quite well as most of you have noticed. In the light of that it feels very bad that people are hacking web sites which actually puts us in a worse light than we need to be in." To the perpetrators of the attack he also pleaded, "If anyone involved in the acts going on is reading this—please stop, for our sake. We don’t need that kind of support."[3]

Flower storm During the ninth day of the trial, after the testimony of professor emeritus Roger Wallis had been completed, he was asked according to Swedish court procedures if he wanted any compensation for appearing in court. He declined this but commented to the court that they were welcome to send flowers to his wife if they wished. This was rejected by the judge but quickly caught on amongst supporters of The Pirate Bay following the proceedings via live feeds and other Internet services. A channel was started on the EFnet network on IRC and a website followed and by the evening flowers for almost SEK 40.000 (US$4,400, €3,500) had been ordered for the couple through Internet florists such as Interflora and local florists.[129]

The Pirate Bay trial

Bonnier Amigo website hack The website of independent record company Bonnier Amigo was hacked on March 1. A similar message as the one on the hacked IFPI website was published, but this time directed to prosecuting attorney Peter Danowsky representing the record labels:[130] [131] Stop lying Peter Danowsky! You censor us, we censor you. Freedom of speech goes both ways. This is a war you can never win. The people always win one way or another. The people will always have their freedom. Brothers stand behind us and together we will win this fight! // CHHB - In times of darkness we appear once again.

References [1] Kravets, David (2008-01-31). "Pirate Bay Future Uncertain After Operators Busted" (http:/ / blog. wired. com/ 27bstroke6/ 2008/ 01/ pirate-bay-futu. html). Threat Level. Wired News Blogs. . Retrieved 2008-09-28. [2] Larsson, Linus (2008-01-31). "Charges filed against the Pirate Bay four" (http:/ / www. idg. se/ 2. 1085/ 1. 143146). Computer Sweden. . Retrieved 2008-02-01. [3] Lindenberger, Michael A. (2009-02-20). "Internet Pirates Face Walking the Plank in Sweden" (http:/ / www. time. com/ time/ business/ article/ 0,8599,1880981,00. html). TIME. . [4] Harvey, Mike (2009-02-18). "Half of Pirate Bay charges dropped" (http:/ / technology. timesonline. co. uk/ tol/ news/ tech_and_web/ article5754740. ece). The Times. . [5] "Piratnämndeman fick lämna uppdrag" (http:/ / sydsvenskan. se/ kultur-och-nojen/ article412141/ Piratnamndeman-fick-lamna-uppdrag. html) (in Swedish). Sydsvenskan. 2009-02-10. . [6] "Unga sympatisörer och äldre nämndemän" (http:/ / blt. se/ nyheter/ tt_inrikes/ unga-sympatisorer-och-aldre-namndeman(1155188). gm) (in Swedish). Blekinge Läns Tidning. 2009-02-16. . [7] Ricknäs, Mikael (2010-03-11). "Pirate Bay Appeals Looks Set to Start in September" (http:/ / www. pcworld. com/ article/ 191304/ pirate_bay_appeals_looks_set_to_start_in_september. html). PC World (IDG). . [8] Pfanner, Eric (2008-01-31). "Swedes charge 4 in case involving copyright infringement of music and films" (http:/ / www. iht. com/ articles/ 2008/ 01/ 31/ business/ pirate. php). International Herald Tribune. . Retrieved 2008-10-01. [9] "Thepiratebay.org – The Pirate Bay" (http:/ / www. alexa. com/ data/ details/ traffic_details/ thepiratebay. org/ ). Alexa Internet. . Retrieved 2008-10-01. [10] Lewan, Mats (2009-04-21). "Sorting out the Pirate Bay verdict" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ 8301-1023_3-10224201-93. html). CNET News. . [11] Nilsson, David (2009-02-16). "Bevisen: Mejl och fakturor" (http:/ / www. aftonbladet. se/ nyheter/ article4428662. ab) (in Swedish). Aftonbladet. . [12] "Police cleared of wrongdoing in Pirate Bay raid" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 6882/ 20070402/ ). The Local. 2007-04-02. . [13] Redogörelse 2007/08:JO1 - Justitieombudsmännens ämbetsberättelse (http:/ / www. riksdagen. se/ Webbnav/ index. aspx?nid=3451& rm=2007/ 08& bet=JO1& typ=frsrdg). Annual Report of the Parliamentary Ombudsman. Parliament of Sweden. (Swedish) [14] "Should The Pirate Bay thank MPAA for its cult following? | Startup Meme" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20080719063921/ http:/ / startupmeme. com/ should-piratebay-thank-mpaa-for-its-cult-following/ ). Startupmeme.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / startupmeme. com/ should-piratebay-thank-mpaa-for-its-cult-following/ ) on 2008-07-19. . Retrieved 2008-09-28. [15] Steal This Film. [16] "The Pirate Bay Not Impressed by Announced Prosecution" (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ the-pirate-bay-not-impressed-by-announced-prosecution/ ). TorrentFreak. 2007-05-04. . Retrieved 2007-05-20. [17] Larsson, Linus (2007-12-11). "Åtal mot The Pirate Bay kan dröja" (http:/ / www. idg. se/ 2. 1085/ 1. 135796) (in Swedish). Computer Sweden (IDG). . [18] Kleja, Monica (2009-01-28). "Rekordlång rättegång mot fildelare" (http:/ / www. nyteknik. se/ nyheter/ it_telekom/ internet/ article499399. ece) (in Swedish). Ny Teknik. . [19] Nilsson, David (2009-02-19). "Förhören med de åtalade forsätter" (http:/ / www. aftonbladet. se/ nyheter/ article4454527. ab) (in Swedish). Aftonbladet. . [20] Brandel, Tobias (2008-04-16). "Ifpi ber Max Peezay om ursäkt" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ kulturnoje/ nyheter/ artikel_1137149. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. . [21] Brandel, Tobias (2008-04-16). "Artist hoppar av Pirate bay-åtalet" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ kulturnoje/ nyheter/ artikel_1137879. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. . [22] Fichtelius, Erik. "Varför satsar vi på Pirate Service?" (http:/ / svt. se/ svt/ jsp/ Crosslink. jsp?d=63873& a=1445342) (in Swedish). 24 Direkt. Sveriges Television. .

The Pirate Bay trial [23] Giertta, Helena (2009-02-10). "SVT direktsänder rättegången mot Pirate Bay" (http:/ / www. journalisten. se/ artikel/ 18246/ svt-direktsaender-raettegangen-mot-pirate-bay) (in Swedish). Journalisten.se. . [24] "Pirate-Bay-Prozess wird live übertragen" (http:/ / www. spiegel. de/ netzwelt/ web/ 0,1518,606954,00. html) (in German). Spiegel Online. . [25] Abrahamsson, Maria (2009-02-23). "Ledarredaktionens blogg – Fichtelius vill påpeka en sak" (http:/ / blogg. svd. se/ ledarbloggen?id=12085) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. . [26] "Sveriges Radio direktsänder Pirate bay-rättegången" (http:/ / www. sr. se/ sida/ artikel. aspx?FormatId=108& ProgramId=3402& Artikel=2631714) (in Swedish). Sveriges Radio. . [27] Anderson, Kevin (2009-02-16). "Avast! Pirate Bay goes on trial" (http:/ / www. guardian. co. uk/ technology/ blog/ 2009/ feb/ 16/ pirate-bay-bittorrent). Guardian. . Retrieved 2009-04-20. [28] "The Pirate Bays Spectrial – Links und Live-Streams | Nerdcore" (http:/ / www. nerdcore. de/ wp/ 2009/ 02/ 16/ the-pirate-bays-spectrial-links-und-live-streams/ ). Nerdcore.de. 2008-10-05. . Retrieved 2009-10-05. [29] "Spectrial" (http:/ / trial. thepiratebay. org/ ). Trial.thepiratebay.org. . Retrieved 2009-10-05. [30] Logged in as click here to log out (2009-02-16). "Avast! Pirate Bay goes on trial | Technology | guardian.co.uk" (http:/ / www. guardian. co. uk/ technology/ blog/ 2009/ feb/ 16/ pirate-bay-bittorrent). Guardian. . Retrieved 2009-10-05. [31] Pirate Bay chiefs deny illegal downloading at trial (http:/ / www. google. com/ hostednews/ afp/ article/ ALeqM5gyIR6YvH9ITqz0v5d2S2W8bUdwdA), AFP (via Google News), February 16, 2009. [32] Pirate Bay prosecutor amends charges (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 17640/ 20090217/ ) The Local, February 17, 2009 [33] Lawyers say it is a sensation (http:/ / www. trelleborgsallehanda. se/ article/ 20090217/ TTINRIKES/ 941131515), Trelleborgs Allehanda, February 17, 2009. [34] "50% of charges dropped" (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ 50-of-charges-against-pirate-bay-dropped-090217/ ). TorrentFreak. 2009-02-17. . [35] Big Content wants $13 million from Pirate Bay as trial starts (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ tech-policy/ news/ 2009/ 02/ labels-want-13-million-from-pirate-bay-as-trial-starts. ars) ARS Technica, February 16, 2009 [36] Day 3 — The Pirate Bay’s ‘King Kong’ Defense (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ g-defense-090218/ ) TorrentFreak, February 18, 2009. [37] European Parliament Directive on electronic commerce (2000/31/EC) (http:/ / eur-lex. europa. eu/ LexUriServ/ LexUriServ. do?uri=CELEX:32000L0031:EN:NOT), 8 June 2000, Official Journal of the European Union, L 178, 17 July 2000. [38] Dag 3 — Advokat Per E Samuelson sakframställning för Carl lundström (http:/ / svtplay. se/ v/ 1448829/ 24direkt/ dag_3_-_advokat_per_e_samuelson_sakframstallning_for_carl_lundstrom?cb,a1366518,1,f,105865/ pb,a1366516,1,f,105865/ pl,v,,1446413/ sb,k105865,1,f,105865) svtplay.se, February 18, 2009. [39] Swartz, Oscar (February 18, 2009). "Pirate Bay Crew Chums Up to Foes Over Lunch" (http:/ / blog. wired. com/ 27bstroke6/ 2009/ 02/ pirate_wednesda. html). Threat Level. Wired News Blogs. . Retrieved February 19, 2009. [40] Rengfors, Kristoffer (2009-02-19). "Internet hyllar King Kong-försvar" (http:/ / www. metro. se/ se/ article/ 2009/ 02/ 18/ 17/ 3449-45/ index. xml) (in Swedish). Metro. . Retrieved February 18, 2009. [41] Chris Dannon (2009-02-19). "Torrent Site Fights Legal Action with 'Chewbacca Defense'" (http:/ / www. fastcompany. com/ blog/ chris-dannen/ techwatch/ torrent-site-fights-legal-action-chewbacca-defense). FastCompany. . Retrieved 2009-02-19. [42] Day 4 - Pirate Bay Defense Calls Foul Over Evidence (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ day-4-pirate-bay-defense-calls-foul-over-evidence-090219/ ) [43] Pirate Bay Trial Day 5: Perry Mason Episode Delays Trial (http:/ / www. mp3newswire. net/ stories/ 9002/ pirate-bay-5. html) – MP3 Newswire, February 20, 2009 [44] Trial plan (http:/ / svt. se/ content/ 1/ c8/ 01/ 44/ 23/ 83/ PB_forhands_2marsc. pdf) revised on March 2, 2009. (Swedish) [45] Dag 8 - Althin förhör Kennedy, IFPI (http:/ / svtplay. se/ v/ 1457214/ 24direkt/ dag_8_-_john_kennedy_forhors_av_nilsson_och_althin). 24 Direkt, Sveriges Television. •

Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Strumpf, Koleman (March 2004). " The effect of file sharing on record sales: An empirical analysis. (http:/ / www. unc. edu/ ~cigar/ papers/ FileSharing_March2004. pdf)" Working paper. • Liebowitz, Stan (August 2007). " How Reliable is the Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf paper on File-Sharing? (http:/ / copyrightalliance. net/ files/ ssrn-id1014399. pdf)" Working paper, University of Texas at Dallas. • Liebowitz, Stan (April 2006). "File Sharing: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?" (http:/ / www. loc. gov/ crb/ proceedings/ 2006-3/ riaa-ex-c-110-dp. pdf). Journal of Law and Economics (University of Chicago) 49: 1. doi:10.1086/503518. . • Michel, Norbert J. (2006). "The Impact of Digital File Sharing on the Music Industry: An Empirical Analysis" (http:/ / norbertmichel. com/ files/ EmpiricalPaperAug2006. pdf). Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy (Berkeley Electronic Press) 6 (1:18). . [46] Dag 9 - Ponten förhör Wallis (http:/ / svtplay. se/ v/ 1459644/ 24direkt/ dag_9_-_roger_wallis_forhors_av_malsagandeadvokaterna_ponten_och_wadsted). 24 Direkt, Sveriges Television (Swedish) (http:/ / svt. se/ 2. 106876/ 1. 1459357/ som-rapporterna_fran_goteborgs_universitet) • • •

Wallis et al. (2005–2006). "Broadband technologies transforming business models and challenging regulatory frameworks – lessons from the music industry." MusicLessons (http:/ / www. musiclessons. se/ ). Royal Institute of Technology. Antoni, Rudolf (2006). " Biopublik i hela landet - Vanor och attityder bortom biokomplexen (http:/ / www. som. gu. se/ rapporter/ biopublik/ hela_landet. pdf)". The SOM institute. (Swedish) Antoni, Rudolf (2007). " Morgondagens publik. Attityder och vanor kring film och bio på 2000-talet (http:/ / www. som. gu. se/ rapporter/ biopublik/ morgondagens_publik2006. pdf)". The SOM institute. (Swedish)

The Pirate Bay trial [47] Stiernstedt, Jenny; Johansson, Astrid E; Söderling, Fredrik; Grassman, Oliver (2009-04-17). "The Pirate Bay sentenced to one year in prison" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ the-pirate-bay-sentenced-to-one-year-in-prison-1. 846915). Dagens Nyheter. . [48] Rengfors, Kristoffer (2009-03-02). "Pläderingar – Därför ska Pirate Bay straffas" (http:/ / www. metro. se/ 2009/ 03/ 02/ 80142/ pladeringar-darfor-ska-pirate-bay-str/ index. xml) (in Swedish). Metro. . [49] NJA 1963 s. 574 [50] NJA 2007 s. 929 (http:/ / www. jurstud. su. se/ filer/ 2007-11-30_B_20961-07_dom. pdf) [51] Kleja, Monica (2009-05-07). "Pirate Bay: Alla fyra överklagar sina domar" (http:/ / www. nyteknik. se/ nyheter/ it_telekom/ internet/ article572056. ece) (in Swedish). Ny Teknik. . [52] Ricknäs, Mikael (2009-04-21). "Pirate Bay Case on Its Way to the Court of Appeal" (http:/ / www. pcworld. com/ article/ 163492/ pirate_bay_case_on_its_way_to_the_court_of_appeal. html). PC World (IDG). . [53] Landes, David; O'Mahony, Paul (2009-05-20). "Showbiz reps appeal for more Pirate Bay loot" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 19572/ 20090520/ ). The Local. . [54] Ström, Sofia (2009-04-17). "How much should they pay" (http:/ / www. aftonbladet. se/ nyheter/ article4931970. ab) (in Swedish). Aftonbladet. . [55] "The Pirate Bay verdict: the reactions" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 18930/ 20090417/ ). The Local. 2009-04-17. . [56] Paine, Andre (2009-04-24). "Billboard Q&A: Lawyers Analyze Pirate Bay Case" (http:/ / www. billboard. biz/ bbbiz/ content_display/ industry/ e3i55fbb4c9063b301d1651610b4d1bb390). Billboard.biz. . [57] Bird & Bird (2009-04-22). "The Pirate Bay case: your questions answered" (http:/ / www. computerweekly. com/ Articles/ 2009/ 04/ 22/ 235748/ the-pirate-bay-case-your-questions-answered. htm). Computer Weekly. . [58] Ricknäs, Mikael (2009-04-17). "The Pirate Bay Four Found Guilty" (http:/ / www. pcworld. com/ article/ 163317/ the_pirate_bay_four_found_guilty. html). PC World (IDG). . [59] "Swedish press: file sharing still ahead of the law" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 18938/ 20090418/ ). The Local. 2009-04-18. . [60] "Nätpirater i sjönöd" (http:/ / sydsvenskan. se/ opinion/ huvudledare/ article426969/ Natpirater-i-sjonod. html) (in Swedish). Sydsvenskan. 2009-04-18. . [61] Gulbrandsen, Per (2009-04-23). "Rättsprofessor kritiserar Pirate Bay-domen: "Konstig"" (http:/ / www. sr. se/ sida/ artikel. aspx?programid=1012& artikel=2787875) (in Swedish). Mitt i musiken (Sveriges Radio P1). . [62] Söderling, Fredrik (2009-04-17). "The Pirate Bay sentence is surprisingly harsh" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ fredrik-soderling-the-pirate-bay-sentence-is-surprisingly-harsh-1. 846920). Dagens Nyheter. . [63] McKenzie, Greg; Cochrane, Greg (2009-04-20). "Paul McCartney: Pirate Bay verdict 'fair'" (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ newsbeat/ hi/ music/ newsid_8007000/ 8007950. stm). Newsbeat (BBC). . [64] "'Illegal file sharing won't stop'" (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ 1/ hi/ technology/ 8004381. stm). BBC News. 2009-04-17. . [65] Standeford, Dugie (2009-04-26). "Mixed Review Of Swedish Pirate Bay Jail Sentences" (http:/ / www. ip-watch. org/ weblog/ 2009/ 04/ 26/ mixed-review-of-swedish-pirate-bay-jail-sentences/ ). Intellectual Property Watch. . [66] "Reactions to the verdict on the Pirate Bay trial" (http:/ / www. recordoftheday. com/ www/ news/ article. php?aid=538). Record of the Day. 2009-04-17. . [67] EuroISPA (2009-04-17). "Reaction on the Pirate Bay verdict" (http:/ / www. euroispa. org/ files/ 090417_euroispa_piratebay_judgement. pdf). Press release. . [68] "Online pirates at bay" (http:/ / www. economist. com/ business/ displaystory. cfm?story_id=13518830). The Economist. 2009-04-17. . [69] "Snow Patrol blast Pirate Bay sentences" (http:/ / www. bigissuescotland. com/ news/ view/ 83). The Big Issue in Scotland. 2009-04-24. . [70] Wallis, Roger (2009-04-24). "Roger Wallis om kurslitteratur för nedladdning" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ debatt-essa/ debatt-student-bay-1. 851471) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [71] Arvidsson, Johan (2009-05-26). "Kulturministerns utfall mot Pirate Bay" (http:/ / nyheter24. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ 232341-kulturministern-gjorde-utfall-mot-pirate-bay) (in Swedish). Nyheter24. . [72] Sandin, Esbjörn; Arvidsson, Henrik (2009-05-27). "Kulturministern KU-anmäls för positivt uttalande om Pirate Bay-domen" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ kulturministern-ku-anmals-for-positivt-uttalande-om-pirate-bay-domen-1. 874325) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [73] Konstitutionsutskottets betänkande 2009/10:KU20 (http:/ / www. riksdagen. se/ webbnav/ index. aspx?nid=3322& rm=2009/ 10& bet=KU20). Parliament of Sweden. (Swedish) [74] Result of Verdict, for the Pirate Party (http:/ / www. blogpirate. org/ 2009/ 04/ 17/ result-of-verdict-for-the-pirate-party/ ). Blog Pirate. April 17, 2009. [75] "Medlemsantal" (http:/ / www. piratpartiet. se/ storlek) from piratpartiet.se, accessed on April 17, 2009 [76] Swedes demonstrate in support of Pirate Bay (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 18954/ 20090419/ ). The Local. April 19, 2009. [77] Swedes Demonstrate Against Pirate Bay Verdict (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ swedes-demonstrate-against-pirate-bay-verdict-090418/ ). TorrentFreak. April 18, 2009. [78] Geere, Duncan. Pirate Bay: "We will not pay any fines!" (http:/ / www. techdigest. tv/ 2009/ 04/ pirate_bay_we_w. html). Tech Digest. April 20, 2009. [79] Sweden: Hundreds Protest Pirate Bay Conviction (http:/ / www. google. com/ hostednews/ ap/ article/ ALeqM5hspvgQydv-el2qT9uJIKl2ElgILAD97KVRAO1). Associated Press. April 18, 2009. [80] ISPs refuse to shut down Pirate Bay (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 18940/ 20090418/ ) The Local. April 18, 2009.

The Pirate Bay trial [81] Olsson, Tobias (2009-04-20). "Flera fildelningssajter stängda" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ artikel_2766265. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. . [82] Anon Causes Mischief For IFPI, Calls For A Media Boycott (http:/ / www. blogpirate. org/ 2009/ 04/ 20/ anon-causes-mischief-for-ifpi-calls-for-a-media-boycott/ ). Blog Pirate. April 20, 2009. [83] Leyden, John. Music industry sites DDoSed after Pirate Bay verdict (http:/ / www. theregister. co. uk/ 2009/ 04/ 20/ ddos_hacktivism_pirate_bay/ ). The Register. April 20, 2009. [84] Arbsjö, Karin (2009-03-05). "Max Peezay släpper singel på The Pirate Bay" (http:/ / sydsvenskan. se/ kultur-och-nojen/ article417276/ Max-Peezay-slapper-ny-singel-pa-The-Pirate-Bay. html) (in Swedish). Sydsvenskan. . [85] Carp, Ossi (2009-05-31). "Advance Patrol släpper ny skiva via The Pirate Bay" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ advance-patrol-slapper-ny-skiva-via-the-pirate-bay-1. 880656) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [86] Thorkildsen, Joakim (2008-04-18). "Pirate Bay-etterforsker fikk jobb hos filmgigant" (http:/ / www. dagbladet. no/ kultur/ 2008/ 04/ 18/ 532940. html) (in Norwegian). Dagbladet. . [87] Kleja, Monica (2008-04-18). "Pirate Bay-polisen bytte sida - Utredningen kan vara ogiltig" (http:/ / www. nyteknik. se/ nyheter/ it_telekom/ internet/ article333849. ece) (in Swedish). Ny Teknik. . [88] Kuprijanko, Alexander (2008-04-21). "Pirate Bay-polisen begärde tjänstledigt under utredningen" (http:/ / sydsvenskan. se/ digitalt/ article317679/ Pirate-Bay-polisen-begarde-tjanstledigt-under-utredningen. html) (in Swedish). Sydsvenskan. . [89] Larsson, Linus (2008-04-18). "Åklagaren: Det har hänt förr" (http:/ / www. idg. se/ 2. 1085/ 1. 156968) (in Swedish). Computer Sweden (IDG). . [90] Trial plan (http:/ / svt. se/ content/ 1/ c8/ 01/ 44/ 23/ 83/ PB_plan_20feb3. pdf) revised on February 20, 2009. (Swedish) [91] Trial plan (http:/ / svt. se/ content/ 1/ c8/ 01/ 45/ 70/ 23/ PB_forhands_25feb. pdf) revised on February 25, 2009. (Swedish) [92] Dag 7 - Förhör med Anders Nilsson, Antipiratbyrån. (http:/ / svtplay. se/ v/ 1456457/ 24direkt/ dag_7_-_forhor_med_anders_nilsson__antipiratbyran) 24 Direkt, Sveriges Television (Swedish) [93] Levy, Oscar (2009-02-10). "Pirate Bay-nämndeman är partisk" (http:/ / nyheter24. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ 131267-pirate-bay-namndeman-ar-partisk) (in Swedish). Nyheter24. . [94] Stiernstedt, Jenny (2009-04-23). "Domaren var orolig för vad som skulle kunna hända om jag satt kvar" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ domaren-var-orolig-for-vad-som-skulle-kunna-handa-om-jag-satt-kvar-1. 850753) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [95] Sokolow, Irene (2009-04-17). "Dom i Pirate Bay-mål idag" (http:/ / www. e24. se/ branscher/ reklammedia/ artikel_1251685. e24) (in Swedish). E24 Näringsliv. . [96] "Pirate Bay lawyer calls for retrial" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 19028/ 20090423/ ). The Local. 2009-04-23. . [97] Stiernstedt, Jenny (2009-04-23). "Monique Wadstedt: "Vi har ingen privat relation"" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ monica-wadstedt-pirate-bay-jav-domare-1. 850489) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [98] Stiernstedt, Jenny (2009-04-23). "The Pirate Bay-rättegången kan tas om" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ the-pirate-bay-rattegangen-kan-tas-om-1. 850410) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [99] Jönsson, Martin; Carlsson, Thorbjörn (2009-05-11). "Försvarar upphovsmännens intressen" (http:/ / www. sr. se/ sida/ gruppsida. aspx?programid=3402& grupp=6915& artikel=2825724) (in Swedish). P3 News (Sveriges Radio). . [100] Johannisson, Emma (2009-04-23). "Domare i Pirate Bay-mål kan vara jävig" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ artikel_2783119. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. . [101] Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå (2009-04-23). "Sakkunnig: "PB-domaren rör sig nära gränsen"" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ sakkunnig-pb-domaren-ror-sig-nara-gransen-1. 850736) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [102] "Tingsrätten: Piratdomaren inte jävig" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ artikel_3031021. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. 2009-06-08. . [103] Malmborg, Niklas (2008-04-24). "JO prövar inte Pirate Bay-jävet" (http:/ / www. dn. se/ kultur-noje/ musik/ jo-provar-inte-pirate-bay-javet-1. 852016) (in Swedish). Dagens Nyheter. . [104] Johannisson, Emma (2009-05-19). "Ihrfelt ny Pirate Bay-domare" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ artikel_2919825. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. . [105] Johannisson, Emma (2009-05-19). "Ny Pirate Bay-domare kan vara jävig" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ artikel_2922921. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. . [106] "Åklagaren: Piratdomaren inte jävig" (http:/ / www. blt. se/ nyheter/ tt_inrikes/ aklagaren-piratdomaren-inte-javig(1376105). gm) (in Swedish). Blekinge Läns Tidning. 2009-06-12. . [107] Svea Court of Appeal (2009-05-20). "Hanteringen av jävsfrågan i Pirate Bay-målet" (http:/ / www. domstol. se/ templates/ DV_Press____10938. aspx) (in Swedish). Press release. . [108] "No retrial in Pirate Bay case" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 20280/ 20090625/ ). The Local. 2009-06-25. . [109] Svea Court of Appeal (2009-06-25). "Svea hovrätt ogillar jävsinvändningen i Pirate Bay-målet" (http:/ / www. domstol. se/ templates/ DV_Press____11044. aspx) (in Swedish). Press release. . [110] "Hearing in the Court of Appeal" (http:/ / www. domstol. se/ templates/ DV_InfoPage____4525. aspx). Sveriges Domstolar. 2007-05-11. . [111] "New bias suspicions in Pirate Bay legal battle" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 22206/ 20090921/ ). The Local. 2009-09-21. . [112] Hernadi, Alexandra (2009-09-21). "Ännu ett misstänkt jäv i TPB-rättegång" (http:/ / www. svd. se/ nyheter/ inrikes/ artikel_3552947. svd) (in Swedish). Svenska Dagbladet. .

The Pirate Bay trial [113] Hielle, Lars-Peter (2009-09-21). "Peter Sunde: "Uppenbart jäv"" (http:/ / www. sr. se/ sida/ artikel. aspx?programid=1646& artikel=3113389) (in Swedish). Sveriges Radio P3. . [114] "Bias allegations mount in Pirate Bay case" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 22270/ 20090924/ ). The Local. 2009-09-24. . [115] "Svea hovrätt ogillar jävsinvändningar i Pirate Bay-målet mot två av hovrättens domare (B 4041-09)" (http:/ / www. domstol. se/ templates/ DV_Press____11265. aspx) (in Swedish). Sveriges Domstolar. 2009-10-06. . [116] "Svea hovrätt förklarar nämndeman jävig att delta i handläggningen av Pirate Bay-målet" (http:/ / www. domstol. se/ templates/ DV_Press____11239. aspx) (in Swedish). Sveriges Domstolar. 2009-09-29. . [117] Benholm, Sofia (2009-12-09). "Förstår om det kan tyckas lite konstigt" (http:/ / svt. se/ 2. 27170/ 1. 1806013/ forstar_om_det_kan_tyckas_lite_konstigt) (in Swedish). Sveriges Television. . [118] Vinthagen Simpson, Peter (2010-05-12). "Pirate Bay judges ruled unbiased" (http:/ / www. thelocal. se/ 26612/ 20100512/ ). The Local. . [119] "TPB-domare är opartiska" (http:/ / sverigesradio. se/ sida/ artikel. aspx?programid=1646& artikel=3692272) (in Swedish). P3 News (Sveriges Radio). 2010-05-12. . [120] Allmänna åklagaren v. Neij and others (http:/ / www. idg. se/ polopoly_fs/ 1. 143041!stamningsansokanpb. pdf), Swedish Prosecutors Agency [121] "MAQS Law Firm - Startpage" (http:/ / www. maqs. se/ ). Maqs.se. . Retrieved 2009-10-05. [122] Jenselius, Michael (October 18, 2010). "Pirate Bay-rättegången över - dom i november" (http:/ / www. idg. se/ 2. 1085/ 1. 346725/ pirate-bay-rattegangen-over---dom-i-november) (in Swedish). idg.se (IDG). . Retrieved October 18, 2010. [123] Fiveash, Kelly (November 26, 2010). "Pirate Bay Verdict: Three Operators Lose Appeal" (http:/ / www. theregister. co. uk/ 2010/ 11/ 26/ pirate_bay_appeal_verdict/ ). . Retrieved November 30, 2010. [124] Ernesto (November 26, 2010,). "The Pirate Bay Appeal Verdict: Guilty Again" (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ the-pirate-bay-appeal-verdict-101126/ ). . Retrieved November 30, 2010. [125] Bryant, Martin (November 26, 2010). "Pirate Bay trial appeal: Defendants face $6.5m fine and jail time". [126] David Hässler (2010-12-22). "Fredrik Neij överklagar till Högsta Domstolen" (http:/ / www. realtid. se/ ArticlePages/ 201012/ 22/ 20101222132650_Realtid175/ 20101222132650_Realtid175. dbp. asp) (in Swedish). Realtid. . [127] Kalstad, Lise Marit (February 18, 2009). "Rødt med egen piratkampanje" (http:/ / www. vl. no/ kultur/ article4135697. ece) (in Norwegian). Vårt Land. . Retrieved February 18, 2009. [128] "Alle disse er kriminelle" (http:/ / www. nettavisen. no/ it/ article2546717. ece) (in Norwegian). Nettavisen. February 18, 2009. . Retrieved February 18, 2009. [129] Julander, Oscar (2009-02-26). "Professorn vittnade - då strömmade blommorna in" (http:/ / www. expressen. se/ Nyheter/ 1. 1480620/ professorn-vittnade-da-strommade-blommorna-in) (in Swedish). Expressen. . [130] "Ännu en webbplats hackad i protest mot skivindustrin" (http:/ / www. idg. se/ 2. 1085/ 1. 215184/ annu-en-webbplats-hackad-i-protest-mot-skivindustrin) (in Swedish). IDG. March 2, 2009. . Retrieved March 3, 2009. [131] "Another Music Industry Website Hacked" (http:/ / www. blogpirate. org/ 2009/ 03/ 01/ music-industry-website-hacked-again/ ). The Blog Pirate. March 1, 2009. . Retrieved March 3, 2009.

External links • Summons (http://www.idg.se/polopoly_fs/1.143041!stamningsansokanpb.pdf)PDF 2008-01-31 ( modified (http://svt.se/content/1/c8/01/44/72/36/Pirate_ataletNY2.pdf) 2009-02-24), International Public Prosecution Office Stockholm (Swedish) • Sveriges Television 24 Direkt audio archive of the Pirate Bay trial (http://svtplay.se/t/102527/ 24direkt?sb,k105865) (Swedish) • Judgment (http://svt.se/content/1/c8/01/52/30/79/Tingsrättens dom.pdf)PDF (408 kB) ( Unofficial English translation (http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/Pirate-Bay-verdict-English-translation.pdf) commissioned by IFPI) – 2009-04-17, Stockholm district court (Swedish) • Appeal court judgment (http://www.svd.se/multimedia/archive/00650/L_s_hela_Pirate_bay_650045a. pdf)PDF - 2010-11-26, Svea Court of Appeal (Swedish)

Music download

Music download A music download is the transferral of a song from an Internet-facing computer or website to a user's local computer. This term encompasses both legal downloads and downloads of copyright material without permission or payment. Popular examples of online music stores that sell digital singles and albums include the iTunes Store, Napster, Zune Marketplace, Amazon MP3, Nokia Music Store, TuneTribe, Kazaa and eMusic. Paid downloads are sometimes encoded with Digital Rights Management that restricts making extra copies of the music or playing purchased songs on certain digital audio players. They are almost always compressed using a lossy codec (usually MPEG-1 Layer 3 or Windows Media), reducing file size and therefore bandwidth requirements. However, this may cause an apparent loss in quality to a listener when compared to a CD, and cause compatibility issues with certain software and devices. Uncompressed files and losslessly compressed files are available at some sites. As of 2006, digital music sales are estimated to have reached a trade value of approximately US$2 billion,[1] with tracks available through 500 online services located in 40 countries, representing around 10 percent of the total global music market. Around the world in 2006, an estimated five billion songs, equating to 38,000 years in music, were swapped on peer-to-peer websites, while 509 million were purchased online.[2] As of January 2011, Apple's iTunes Store alone saw $1.1 billion of revenue in fiscal Q1.[3]

Music downloads offered by artists Some artists allow their songs to be downloaded from their websites, often as a short preview or a low-quality sampling. Others have embedded services in their sites that allow purchases of their singles or albums.

Challenges to legal music downloads Even legal music downloads have faced a number of challenges from artists, record labels and the Recording Industry Association of America. In July 2007, the Universal Music Group decided not to renew their long-term contracts with iTunes. This legal challenge was primarily based upon the issue of pricing of songs, as Universal wanted to be able to charge more or less depending on the artist, a shift away from iTunes' standard 99 cents per song pricing. Many industry leaders feel that this is only the first of many show-downs between Apple Inc. and the various record labels.[4]

The RIAA against illegal downloading The Recording Industry Association of America launched its first lawsuits on September 8, 2003, against individuals illegally downloading music files from the Kazaa FastTrack network. At first, the RIAA's campaign to sue illegal downloaders looked like a bad idea to many critics; however, two years after it began, the campaign had survived at least one major legal challenge and began to pick up speed. The RIAA said that it filed 750 suits in February 2006 [5] against individuals downloading music files without paying for them in hopes of putting an end to Internet music piracy. Many say that it is unfair for the RIAA to choose certain individuals to sue out of millions, but the RIAA dismisses the charge that the suits are unfair, comparing them to those who get targeted for speeding tickets. The RIAA hopes their campaign will force people to respect the copyrights of music labels and eventually minimize the number of illegal downloads that happen every day.[6]

Music download

Chart inclusion United States Legal music downloads were first compiled by Billboard in 1993, but they did not gain mainstream acceptance in the United States until around February 2005, when digital sales for singles started to be included in the Billboard Hot 100 and other Billboard charts. In the year before, the Hot 100 chart was similar to the Hot 100 Airplay chart, because only minor CD-single sales affected the chart. The inclusion of digital singles, as seen in the Hot Digital Songs, has immensely helped many songs chart and peak higher, in some cases in the absence of a radio release. Single certifications were introduced in February 2005. Songs that sell a certain number of copies are often certified by the RIAA with the permission of the artist and the record company.

United Kingdom The UK Official Download Chart was launched on September 1, 2004 and included any Permanent Digital Download track, under 10 minutes long, being sold for a minimum price of 40p (0.4 GBP). In January 2005, downloaded tracks outsold physical singles for the first time in UK music history, prompting The Official UK Charts Company to begin to incorporate downloads for the first time into the UK Singles Chart on 17 April 2005, at which time Radio 1 stopped broadcasting the separate download chart, although the chart is still compiled. Initially this was on condition that the song must have a physical media release at the same time; this rule was fully lifted on January 1, 2007, meaning all download sales are now eligible in the chart.

Sales records United States In November 2005, the record for the best-selling digital single in the United States was held by Gwen Stefani's "Hollaback Girl", which had sold over one million downloads, making it the first song to achieve platinum download status. As of 2009, the record for the best-selling digital single in the United States on the iTunes Store is held by The Black Eyed Peas's "I Gotta Feeling", which had sold over 5,561,000 downloads. The highest weekly sales record was held by Kanye West with the single "Gold Digger", his record was broken by Britney Spears's "Hold It Against Me", which had first-week sales of 411,000. Later, the record was broken by Lady Gaga's Born This Way, with 484,000 downloads. Overall, the song with the most downloads in history is OneRepublic's 'Apologize' with 10 million legal downloads from both its original version and remixed version done by Timbaland. Soon after his death in 2009, Michael Jackson became the first artist to sell over one million download songs in a week. [7]

Music download

Japan The highest selling digital single in Japan, and the world, is "Flavor Of Life" by Hikaru Utada with 7.7 million legal downloads. 40% of Japanese internet users access a music website, and Japan has the highest penetration of iTunes software users in the world.[8]

References [1] 2007, IFPI Digital Music Report 2007 (http:/ / www. ifpi. org/ content/ section_resources/ digital-music-reportb. html) , IFPI [2] June 2008, The Tables Have Turned: Rock Stars â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Not Record Labels â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Cashing In On Digital Revolution (http:/ / www. ibisworld. com/ pressrelease/ pressrelease. aspx?prid=127), IBISWorld [3] January 19 2011, Apple's iTunes revenues top $1.1 billion in Q1 (http:/ / www. fiercemobilecontent. com/ story/ apples-itunes-revenues-top-11-billion-q1/ 2011-01-19), FierceMobileContent [4] Universal in Dispute With Apple Over iTunes (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2007/ 07/ 02/ business/ media/ 02universal. html) [5] Riaa Announces New Round Of Music Theft Lawsuits (http:/ / www. riaa. com/ newsitem. php?news_month_filter=2& news_year_filter=2006& resultpage=& id=F7ED251F-6E08-52D9-A805-22662F5E4D4F) [6] Jason Krause. "Breaking up dowloading." ABA Journal 92.(2006): 16,18. Research Library. ProQuest. Georgia State University Library, Atlanta, Georgia. 12 November 2008 ProQuest.com (http:/ / www. proquest. com) [7] http:/ / thenextweb. com/ 2009/ 07/ 02/ michael-jackson-sell-1-million-downloads-week/ [8] Nearly 25 Percent of Japanese Internet Users Accessed iTunes in August, According to comScore World Metrix (http:/ / www. comscore. com/ Press_Events/ Press_Releases/ 2008/ 11/ Japanese_iTunes_Usage)

Digital rights management Digital rights management (DRM) is a term for access control technologies that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders and individuals to limit the use of digital content and devices. The term is used to describe any technology that inhibits uses of digital content that is not desired or intended by the content provider. The term does not generally refer to other forms of copy protection, which can be circumvented without modifying the file or device, such as serial numbers or keyfiles. It can also refer to restrictions associated with specific instances of digital works or devices. Companies such as Sony, Amazon, Apple Inc., Microsoft, AOL and the BBC use the power of digital rights management. In 1998 the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was passed in the United States to impose criminal penalties on those who circumvent encryption.[1] The use of digital rights management is controversial. Corporations claim that DRM is necessary to fight copyright infringement online and keep users safe from computer viruses. DRM can help the copyright holder maintain artistic integrity[2] or ensure continued revenue streams.[3] Those opposed to DRM argue that there is no evidence that DRM helps prevent copyright infringement or computer viruses and that DRM helps big business stifle innovation and competition.[4] Proponents argue that digital locks should be considered necessary to prevent intellectual property from being stolen, just as physical locks are needed to prevent personal property from being stolen.[5] Digital locks placed in accordance with DRM policies can also restrict users from doing something perfectly legal, such as making backup copies of CDs or DVDs, lending materials out through a library, accessing works in a public domain, or using copyrighted materials for research and education under fair use laws.[5] Some opponents, such as the Free Software Foundation (through its Defective By Design campaign), maintain that the use of the word "rights" is misleading and suggest that people instead use the term digital restrictions management.[6] Their position is essentially that copyright holders are restricting the use of material in ways that are beyond the scope of existing copyright laws, and should not be covered by future laws.[7] The Electronic Frontier Foundation, and other opponents, also consider the use of DRM systems [8] to be anti-competitive practice.[9] This position holds that the user needs legal protection.[10]

Digital rights management

Introduction DRM technologies attempt to control use of digital media by preventing access, copying or conversion to other formats by end users. Long before the arrival of digital or even electronic media, copyright holders, content producers, or other financially or artistically interested parties had business and legal objections to copying technologies. Examples include: player piano rolls early in the 20th century, audio tape recording, and video tape recording (e.g., the "Betamax case" in the U.S.). Copying technology thus exemplifies a disruptive technology. The advent of digital media and analog/digital conversion technologies, especially those that are usable on mass-market general-purpose personal computers, has vastly increased the concerns of copyright-dependent individuals and organizations, especially within the music and movie industries, because these individuals and organizations are partly or wholly dependent on the revenue generated from such works. While analog media inevitably loses quality with each copy generation, and in some cases even during normal use, digital media files may be duplicated an unlimited number of times with no degradation in the quality of subsequent copies. The advent of personal computers as household appliances has made it convenient for consumers to convert media (which may or may not be copyrighted) originally in a physical/analog form or a broadcast form into a universal, digital form (this process is called ripping) for location- or timeshifting. This, combined with the Internet and popular file sharing tools, has made unauthorized distribution of copies of copyrighted digital media (digital piracy) much easier. DRM technologies have enabled publishers to enforce access policies that not only disallow copyright infringements, but also prevent lawful fair use of copyrighted works, or even implement use constraints on non-copyrighted works that they distribute; examples include the placement of DRM on certain public-domain or open-licensed e-books, or DRM included in consumer electronic devices that time-shift (and apply DRM to) both copyrighted and non-copyrighted works. DRM is most commonly used by the entertainment industry (e.g., film and recording).[11] Many online music stores, such as Apple Inc.'s iTunes Store, as well as many e-book publishers have implemented DRM. In recent years, a number of television producers have implemented DRM on consumer electronic devices to control access to the freely-broadcast content of their shows, in response to the rising popularity of time-shifting digital video recorder systems such as TiVo.[12]

Common DRM techniques Digital Rights Management Techniques include: Restrictive Licensing Agreements: The access to digital materials, copyright and public domain are controlled. Some restrictive licenses are imposed on consumers as a condition of entering a website or when downloading software.[13] Encryption, Scrambling of expressive material, and embedding of a tag: This technology is designed to control access and reproduction of online information. This includes backup copies for personal use.[14]

Technologies DRM and film An early example of a DRM system was the Content Scrambling System (CSS) employed by the DVD Forum on film DVDs since ca. 1996. CSS used a simple encryption algorithm, and required device manufacturers to sign license agreements that restricted the inclusion of features, such as digital outputs that could be used to extract high-quality digital copies of the film, in their players. Thus, the only consumer hardware capable of decoding DVD films was controlled, albeit indirectly, by the DVD Forum, restricting the use of DVD media on other systems until the release of DeCSS by Jon Lech Johansen in 1999, which allowed a CSS-encrypted DVD to play properly on a computer using Linux, for which the Alliance had not arranged a licensed version of the CSS playing software.

Digital rights management Microsoft's Windows Vista contains a DRM system called the Protected Media Path, which contains the Protected Video Path (PVP). PVP tries to stop DRM-restricted content from playing while unsigned software is running in order to prevent the unsigned software from accessing the content. Additionally, PVP can encrypt information during transmission to the monitor or the graphics card, which makes it more difficult to make unauthorized recordings. Advanced Access Content System (AACS) is a DRM system for HD DVD and Blu-ray Discs developed by the AACS Licensing Administrator, LLC (AACS LA), a consortium that includes Disney, Intel, Microsoft, Matsushita (Panasonic), Warner Brothers, IBM, Toshiba and Sony. In December 2006 a process key was published on the internet by hackers, enabling unrestricted access to AACS-restricted HD DVD content.[15] After the cracked keys were revoked, further cracked keys were released.[16]

DRM and television The CableCard standard is used by cable television providers in the United States to restrict content to services to which the customer has subscribed. The broadcast flag concept was developed by Fox Broadcasting in 2001 and was supported by the MPAA and the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). A ruling in May 2005 by a US Court of Appeals held that the FCC lacked authority to impose it on the TV industry in the US. It required that all HDTVs obey a stream specification determining whether or not a stream can be recorded. This could block instances of fair use, such as time-shifting. It achieved more success elsewhere when it was adopted by the Digital Video Broadcasting Project (DVB), a consortium of about 250 broadcasters, manufactures, network operators, software developers, and regulatory bodies from about 35 countries involved in attempting to develop new digital TV standards. An updated variant of the broadcast flag has been developed in the Content Protection and Copy Management (DVB-CPCM). It was developed in private, and the technical specification was submitted to European governments in March 2007. As with much DRM, the CPCM system is intended to control use of copyrighted material by the end-user, at the direction of the copyright holder. According to Ren Bucholz of the EFF, which paid to be a member of the consortium, "You won't even know ahead of time whether and how you will be able to record and make use of particular programs or devices".[17] The DVB supports the system as it will harmonize copyright holders' control across different technologies and so make things easier for end users. The normative sections have now all been approved for publication by the DVB Steering Board, and will be published by ETSI as a formal European Standard as ETSI TS 102 825-X where X refers to the Part number of specification. Nobody has yet stepped forward to provide a Compliance and Robustness regime for the standard (though several are rumoured to be in development), so it is not presently possible to fully implement a system, as there is nowhere to obtain the necessary device certificates.

DRM and music Audio CDs Discs with digital rights management schemes are not legitimately standards-compliant Compact Discs (CDs) but are rather CD-ROM media. Therefore they all lack the CD logotype found on discs which follow the standard (known as Red Book). Therefore these CDs could not be played on all CD players. Many consumers could also no longer play purchased CDs on their computers. Personal computers running Microsoft Windows would sometimes even crash when attempting to play the CDs.[18] In 2005, Sony BMG introduced new DRM technology which installed DRM software on users' computers without clearly notifying the user or requiring confirmation. Among other things, the installed software included a rootkit, which created a severe security vulnerability others could exploit. When the nature of the DRM involved was made public much later, Sony initially minimized the significance of the vulnerabilities its software had created, but was eventually compelled to recall millions of CDs, and released several attempts to patch the surreptitiously included

Digital rights management software to at least remove the rootkit. Several class action lawsuits were filed, which were ultimately settled by agreements to provide affected consumers with a cash payout or album downloads free of DRM.[19] Sony's DRM software actually had only a limited ability to prevent copying, as it affected only playback on Windows computers, not on other equipment. Even on the Windows platform, users regularly bypassed the restrictions. And, while the Sony DRM technology created fundamental vulnerabilities in customers' computers, parts of it could be trivially bypassed by holding down the "shift" key while inserting the CD, or by disabling the autorun feature. In addition, audio tracks could simply be played and re-recorded, thus completely bypassing all of the DRM (this is known as the analog hole). Sony's first two attempts at releasing a patch which would remove the DRM software from users' computers failed. In January 2007, EMI stopped publishing audio CDs with DRM, stating that "the costs of DRM do not measure up to the results." [20] Following EMI, Sony BMG was the last publisher to abolish DRM completely, and audio CDs containing DRM are no longer released by the four record labels.[21] Nokia corporation uses DRM protection with all the preloaded contents distributed with each Nokia device. Internet music Many online music stores employ DRM to restrict usage of music purchased and downloaded online. There are many options for consumers wishing to purchase digital music over the internet: • Prior to 2009, Apple's iTunes Store utilized the FairPlay DRM system for music. In May of 2007, EMI tracks became available in iTunes Plus format at a higher price point. These tracks were higher quality (256 kbps) and DRM free. In October of 2007, the cost of iTunes Plus tracks was lowered to US$0.99.[22] In April of 2009, all iTunes music became available completely DRM free. (Videos sold and rented through iTunes, as well as iOS Apps, however, were to continue using Apple's FairPlay DRM.) • Napster music store offers a subscription-based approach to DRM alongside permanent purchases. Users of the subscription service can download and stream an unlimited amount of music transcoded to Windows Media Audio (WMA) while subscribed to the service. But when the subscription period lapses, all of the downloaded music is unplayable until the user renews his or her subscription. Napster also charges users who wish to use the music on their portable device an additional $5 per month. In addition, Napster gives users the option of paying an additional $0.99 per track to burn it to CD or for the song to never expire. Music bought through Napster can be played on players carrying the Microsoft PlaysForSure logo (which, notably, do not include iPods or even Microsoft's own Zune). As of June 2009 Napster is giving DRM free MP3 music, which can be played on iPhones and iPods. • Wal-Mart Music Downloads, another online music download store, charges $0.94 per track for all non-sale downloads. All Wal-Mart, Music Downloads are able to be played on any Windows PlaysForSure marked product. The music does play on the SanDisk's Sansa mp3 player, for example, but must be copied to the player's internal memory. It cannot be played through the player's microSD card slot, which is a problem that many users of the mp3 player experience. • Sony operated an online music download service called "Connect" which used Sony's proprietary OpenMG DRM technology. Music downloaded from this store (usually via Sony's SonicStage software) was only playable on computers running Microsoft Windows and Sony hardware (including the PSP and some Sony Ericsson phones). • Kazaa is one of a few services offering a subscription-based pricing model. However, music downloads from the Kazaa website are DRM-protected, and can only be played on computers or portable devices running Windows Media Player, and only as long as the customer remains subscribed to Kazaa. The various services are currently not interoperable, though those that use the same DRM system (for instance the several Windows Media DRM format stores, including Napster, Kazaa and Yahoo Music) all provide songs that can be played side-by-side through the same player program. Almost all stores require client software of some sort to be

Digital rights management downloaded, and some also need plug-ins. Several colleges and universities, such as Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, have made arrangements with assorted Internet music suppliers to provide access (typically DRM-restricted) to music files for their students, to less than universal popularity, sometimes making payments from student activity fee funds.[23] One of the problems is that the music becomes unplayable after leaving school unless the student continues to pay individually. Another is that few of these vendors are compatible with the most common portable music player, the Apple iPod. The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property (to HMG in the UK; 141 pages, 40+ specific recommendations) has taken note of the incompatibilities, and suggests (Recommendations 8â&#x20AC;&#x201D;12) that there be explicit fair dealing exceptions to copyright allowing libraries to copy and format-shift between DRM schemes, and further allowing end users to do the same privately. If adopted, some of the acrimony may decrease. Although DRM is prevalent for Internet music, some online music stores such as eMusic, Dogmazic, Amazon, and Beatport, do not use DRM despite encouraging users to avoid sharing music. Another online retailer, Xiie.net, which sells only unsigned artists, encourages people to share the music they buy from the site, to increase exposure for the artists themselves. Major labels have begun releasing more online music without DRM. Eric Bangeman suggests in Ars Technica that this is because the record labels are "slowly beginning to realize that they can't have DRMed music and complete control over the online music market at the same time... One way to break the cycle is to sell music that is playable on any digital audio player. eMusic does exactly that, and their surprisingly extensive catalog of non-DRMed music has vaulted it into the number two online music store position behind the iTunes Store."[24] Apple's Steve Jobs has called on the music industry to eliminate DRM in an open letter titled Thoughts on Music.[25] Apple's iTunes store will start to sell DRM-free 256 kbit/s (up from 128 kbit/s) AAC encoded music from EMI for a premium price (this has since reverted to the standard price). In March 2007, Musicload.de, one of Europe's largest online music retailers, announced their position strongly against DRM. In an open letter, Musicload stated that three out of every four calls to their customer support phone service are as a result of consumer frustration with DRM.[26]

Computer games Computer games sometimes use DRM technologies to limit the number of systems the game can be installed on by requiring authentication with an online server. Most games with this restriction allow three or five installs, although some allow an installation to be 'recovered' when the game is uninstalled. This not only limits users who have more than three or five computers in their homes (seeing as the rights of the software developers allow them to limit the number of installations), but can also prove to be a problem if the user has to unexpectedly perform certain tasks like upgrading operating systems or reformatting the computer's hard drive, tasks which, depending on how the DRM is implemented, count a game's subsequent reinstall as a new installation, making the game potentially unusable after a certain period even if it is only used on a single computer. In mid-2008, the publication of Mass Effect marked the start of a wave of titles primarily making use of SecuROM and Steam for DRM and requiring authentication via an online server. The use of DRM scheme in 2008's Spore backfired and there were protests, resulting in a considerable number of users seeking a pirated version instead. This backlash against 3 activation limit was a significant factor in Spore becoming the most pirated game in 2008.[27] [28] Many mainstream publishers continued to rely on online-based DRM throughout the later half of 2008 and early 2009, including Electronic Arts, Ubisoft and Atari. Ubisoft broke with the tendency to use online DRM in late 2008 with the release of Prince of Persia as an experiment to "see how truthful people really are" [29] regarding the claim that DRM was inciting people to use pirated copies. Although Ubisoft has not commented on the results of the 'experiment', the majority of their subsequent titles in 2009 contained no online-based DRM since the release of Prince of Persia - notable examples being Anno 1404 and James Cameron's Avatar: The Game making use of the online version of the TAGES copy protection system. An official patch has since been released stripping Anno 1404 of the DRM. Electronic Arts followed suit in June 2009 with The Sims 3,[30] with subsequent EA and EA Sports titles also being devoid of online DRM.

Digital rights management Ubisoft formally announced a return to on-line authentication on 9 February 2010 through its Uplay on-line gaming platform, starting with Silent Hunter 5, The Settlers 7 and Assassin's Creed 2.[31] Silent Hunter V was first reported to have been compromised within 24 hours of release,[32] but users of the cracked version soon found out that only early parts of the game were playable.[33] The Uplay system works by having the installed game on the local PCs incomplete and then continuously downloading parts of the game-code from Ubisoft's servers as the game progresses, making cracking games using the system a daunting task.[34] It was only more than a month after the PC release in the first week of April that software was released that could bypass Ubisoft's DRM in Assassin's Creed 2, demonstrating its strength. The software did this by emulating a Ubisoft server for the game. Later that month, a real crack was released that was able to remove the connection requirement altogether.[35] [36] No fully working crack for Silent Hunter V has been confirmed. In early March, 2010, Uplay servers suffered a period of inaccessibility due to a large scale DDoS attack, causing around 5% of game owners to become locked out of playing their game.[37] The company later credited owners of the affected games with a free download, and there has been no further downtime.[38] Some most prominent cases making use of online DRM technology SecuROM include Spore, BioShock, Mass Effect and Gears Of War.

E-books Electronic books read on a personal computer or an e-book reader typically use DRM restrictions to limit copying, printing, and sharing of e-books. E-books are usually limited to a certain number of reading devices and some e-publishers prevent any copying or printing. Some commentators believe that DRM is something that makes E-book publishing complex.[39] There are four main ebook formats at present. Mobipocket, Topaz, ePub and PDF. The Amazon Kindle uses Mobipocket and Topaz and it also supports native PDF format ebooks and native PDF files. Other ebook readers mostly use ePub format ebooks, but with differing DRM schemes. There are four main ebook DRM schemes at present, one each from Adobe, Apple, Barnes & Noble and Amazon. Adobe's Adept DRM is applied to ePubs and PDFs, and can be read by several third-party ebook readers, as well as Adobe's Adobe Digital Editions software. Apple's Fairplay DRM is applied to ePubs,and can currently only be read by Apple's iBooks app on iOS devices. Barnes & Noble's DRM scheme is implemented by Adobe, and is applied to ePubs and the older Palm format ebooks. Amazon's DRM is an adaption of the original Mobipocket encryption, and is applied to Amazon's Mobipocket and Topaz format ebooks. Two software programs to view e-books are Adobe Reader and Microsoft Reader.[40] Each program uses a slightly different approach to DRM. The first version of Adobe Acrobat e-book Reader to have encryption technologies was version 5.05. In the later version 6.0, the technologies of the PDF reader and the e-book reader were combined, allowing it to read both DRM-restricted and unrestricted files.[40] After opening the file, the user is able to view the rights statement, which outlines actions available for the specific document. For example, for a freely transferred PDF, printing, copying to the clipboard, and other basic functions are available to the user. However, when viewing a more highly restricted e-book, the user is unable to print the book, copy or paste selections.[40] The level of restriction is specified by the publisher or distribution agency.[41] Microsoft Reader, which exclusively reads e-books in a .lit format, contains its own DRM software. In Microsoft Reader there are three different levels of access control depending on the e-book: sealed e-books, inscribed e-books and owner exclusive e-books. Sealed e-books have the least amount of restriction and only prevent the document from being modified.[40] Therefore, the reader cannot alter the content of the book to change the ending, for instance. Inscribed e-books are the next level of restriction. After purchasing and downloading the e-book, Microsoft Reader puts a digital ID tag to identify the owner of the e-book. Therefore, this discourages distribution of the e-book because it is inscribed with the ownerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s name making it possible to trace it back to the original copy that was distributed.[40] Other e-book software uses similar DRM schemes. For example, Palm Digital Media, now known as

Digital rights management Ereader, links the credit card information of the purchaser to the e-book copy in order to discourage distribution of the books.[42] The most stringent form of security that Microsoft Reader offers is called owner exclusive e-books, which uses traditional DRM technologies. To buy the e-book the consumer must first open Microsoft Reader, which ensures that when the book is downloaded it becomes linked to the computer’s Microsoft Passport account. Thus the e-book can only be opened with the computer with which it was downloaded, preventing copying and distribution of the text.[40] In one instance of DRM that caused a rift with consumers, Amazon.com remotely deleted purchased copies of George Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm from customer's Amazon Kindles after providing them a refund for the purchased products.[43] Commenters have widely described these actions as Orwellian, and have alluded to Big Brother from Orwell's 1984.[44] [45] [46] [47] After an apology from Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, the Free Software Foundation has written that this is just one more example of the excessive power Amazon has to remotely censor what people read through its software, and called upon Amazon to free its e-book reader and drop DRM.[48] It was then revealed that the reason behind the deletion on Amazon's part was due to the ebooks in question being unauthorized reproductions of Orwell's works over which the company that published and sold it on Amazon's service had no rights as the works were not within the public domain. [49]

DRM and documents Enterprise digital rights management (E-DRM or ERM) is the application of DRM technology to the control of access to corporate documents such as Microsoft Word, PDF, and AutoCAD files, emails, and intranet web pages rather than to the control of consumer media.[50] E-DRM, now more commonly referenced as IRM (Information Rights Management), is generally intended to prevent the unauthorized use (such as industrial or corporate espionage or inadvertent release) of proprietary documents. IRM typically integrates with content management system software. DRM has been used by organizations such as the British Library in its secure electronic delivery service to permit worldwide access to substantial numbers of rare (and in many cases unique) documents which, for legal reasons, were previously only available to authorized individuals actually visiting the Library's document centre at Boston Spa in England.

Watermarks Digital watermarks are features of media that are added during production or distribution. Digital watermarks involve data that is arguably steganographically embedded within the audio or video data. Watermarks can be used for different purposes that may include: • • • •

recording the copyright owner recording the distributor recording the distribution chain identifying the purchaser of the music

Watermarks are not complete DRM mechanisms in their own right, but are used as part of a system for Digital Rights Management, such as helping provide prosecution evidence for purely legal avenues of rights management, rather than direct technological restriction. Some programs used to edit video and/or audio may distort, delete, or otherwise interfere with watermarks. Signal/modulator-carrier chromatography may also separate watermarks from original audio or detect them as glitches. Use of third party media players and other advanced programs render watermarking useless . Additionally, comparison of two separately obtained copies of audio using simple, home-grown algorithms can often reveal watermarks. New methods of detection are currently under investigation by both industry and non-industry researchers.

Digital rights management

Metadata Sometimes, metadata is included in purchased music which records information such as the purchaser's name, account information, or email address. This information is not embedded in the played audio or video data, like a watermark, but is kept separate, but within the file or stream. As an example, metadata is used in media purchased from Apple's iTunes Store for DRM-free as well as DRM-restricted versions of their music or videos. This information is included as MPEG standard metadata.[51] [52]

Laws regarding DRM Digital rights management systems have received some international legal backing by implementation of the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT). Article 11 of the Treaty requires nations party to the treaties to enact laws against DRM circumvention. The WCT has been implemented in most member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization. The American implementation is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), while in Europe the treaty has been implemented by the 2001 European directive on copyright, which requires member states of the European Union to implement legal protections for technological prevention measures. In 2006, the lower house of the French parliament adopted such legislation as part of the controversial DADVSI law, but added that protected DRM techniques should be made interoperable, a move which caused widespread controversy in the United States.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is an amendment to United States copyright law passed unanimously on May 14, 1998, which criminalizes the production and dissemination of technology that allows users to circumvent technical copy-restriction methods. Under the Act, circumvention of a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work is illegal if done with the primary intent of violating the rights of copyright holders. (For a more detailed analysis of the statute, see WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act.) Reverse engineering of existing systems is expressly permitted under the Act under specific conditions. Under the reverse engineering safe harbor, circumvention necessary to achieve interoperability with other software is specifically authorized. See 17 U.S.C. Sec. 1201(f). Open-source software to decrypt content scrambled with the Content Scrambling System and other encryption techniques presents an intractable problem with the application of the Act. Much depends on the intent of the actor. If the decryption is done for the purpose of achieving interoperability of open source operating systems with proprietary operating systems, the circumvention would be protected by Section 1201(f) the Act. Cf., Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001) at notes 5 and 16. However, dissemination of such software for the purpose of violating or encouraging others to violate copyrights has been held illegal. See Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 346 (S.D.N.Y. 2000). On 22 May 2001, the European Union passed the EU Copyright Directive, an implementation of the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty that addressed many of the same issues as the DMCA. The DMCA has been largely ineffective in protecting DRM systems[53] , as software allowing users to circumvent DRM remains widely available. However, those who wish to preserve the DRM systems have attempted to use the Act to restrict the distribution and development of such software, as in the case of DeCSS. Although the Act contains an exception for research, the exception is subject to vague qualifiers that do little to reassure researchers. Cf., 17 U.S.C. Sec. 1201(g). The DMCA has had an impact on cryptography, because many fear that cryptanalytic research may violate the DMCA. The arrest of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov in 2001, for alleged infringement of the DMCA, was a highly publicized example of the law's use to prevent or penalize development of anti-DRM measures. Sklyarov was arrested in the United States after a presentation at DEF CON,

Digital rights management and subsequently spent several months in jail. The DMCA has also been cited as chilling to non-criminal inclined users, such as students of cryptanalysis (including, in a well-known instance, Professor Felten and students at Princeton[54] ), and security consultants such as the Netherlands based Niels Ferguson, who has declined to publish information about vulnerabilities he discovered in an Intel secure-computing scheme because of his concern about being arrested under the DMCA when he travels to the US. On 25 April 2007 the European Parliament supported the first directive of EU, which aims to harmonize criminal law in the member states. It adopted a first reading report on harmonizing the national measures for fighting copyright abuse. If the European Parliament and the Council approve the legislation, the submitted directive will oblige the member states to consider a crime a violation of international copyright committed with commercial purposes. The text suggests numerous measures: from fines to imprisonment, depending on the gravity of the offense. The EP members supported the Commission motion, changing some of the texts. They excluded patent rights from the range of the directive and decided that the sanctions should apply only to offenses with commercial purposes. Copying for personal, non-commercial purposes was also excluded from the range of the directive.

International issues In Europe, there are several ongoing dialog activities that are characterized by their consensus-building intention: • Workshop on Digital Rights Management of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), January 2001.[55] • Participative preparation of the European Committee for Standardization/Information Society Standardization System (CEN/ISSS) DRM Report, 2003 (finished).[56] • DRM Workshops of Directorate-General for Information Society and Media (European Commission) (finished), and the work of the DRM working groups (finished), as well as the work of the High Level Group on DRM (ongoing).[57] • Consultation process of the European Commission, DG Internal Market, on the Communication COM(2004)261 by the European Commission on "Management of Copyright and Related Rights" (closed).[58] • The INDICARE project is an ongoing dialogue on consumer acceptability of DRM solutions in Europe. It is an open and neutral platform for exchange of facts and opinions, mainly based on articles by authors from science and practice. • The AXMEDIS project is a European Commission Integrated Project of the FP6. The main goal of AXMEDIS is automating the content production, copy protection and distribution, reducing the related costs and supporting DRM at both B2B and B2C areas harmonizing them. • The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property is the result of a commission by the British Government from Andrew Gowers, undertaken in December 2005 and published in 2006, with recommendations regarding copyright term, exceptions, orphaned works, and copyright enforcement.

Digital rights management

Controversy DRM opposition Many organizations, prominent individuals, and computer scientists are opposed to DRM. Two notable DRM critics are John Walker, as expressed for instance, in his article The Digital Imprimatur: How big brother and big media can put the Internet genie back in the bottle,[59] and Richard Stallman in his article The Right to Read[60] and in other public statements: "DRM is an example of a malicious feature - a feature designed to hurt the user of the software, and therefore, it's something for which there can never be toleration".[61] Professor Ross Anderson of Cambridge University heads a British organization which opposes DRM and similar efforts in the UK and elsewhere. Cory Doctorow, a prominent writer and technology blogger, spoke on the Microsoft campus criticizing the technology, the morality, and the marketing of DRM.[62] A parody on the Home Taping Is Killing Music

There have been numerous others who see DRM at a more logo. fundamental level. TechMediums.com [63] argues that DRM-free music allows for viral marketing, arguing that independent artists benefit from "free marketing" and can then focus on revenues from higher margin products like merchandise and concert ticket sales. This is similar to some of the ideas in Michael H. Goldhaber's presentation about "The Attention Economy and the Net" at a 1997 conference on the "Economics of Digital Information."[64] (sample quote from the "Advice for the Transition" section of that presentation:[64] "If you can't figure out how to afford it without charging, you may be doing something wrong.") The Electronic Frontier Foundation and similar organizations such as FreeCulture.org also hold positions which are characterized as opposed to DRM. The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure has criticized DRM's impact as a trade barrier from a free market perspective. The final version of the GNU General Public License version 3, as released by the Free Software Foundation, has a provision that 'strips' DRM of its legal value, so people can break the DRM on GPL software without breaking laws like the DMCA. Also, in May 2006, the FSF launched a "Defective by Design" campaign against DRM.[65] [66] Creative Commons provides licensing options encouraging the expansion of and building upon creative work without the use of DRM.[67] In addition, the use of DRM by a licensee to restrict the freedoms granted by a Creative Commons license is a breach of the Baseline Rights asserted by each license.[68] Bill Gates spoke about DRM at CES in 2006. According to him, DRM is not where it should be, and causes problems for legitimate consumers while trying to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate users.[69] According to Steve Jobs, Apple opposes DRM music after a public letter calling its music labels to stop requiring DRM on its iTunes Store. As of January 6, 2009, the iTunes Store is DRM-free for songs.[70] However, Apple considers DRM on video content as a separate issue and has not removed DRM from all of its video catalog.

Digital rights management

44 As already noted, many DRM opponents consider "digital rights management" to be a misnomer. They argue that DRM manages rights (or access) the same way prison manages freedom and often refer to it as "digital restrictions management". Alternatively, ZDNet Executive Editor David Berlind suggests the term "Content Restriction, Annulment and Protection" or "CRAP" for short.[71]

The Norwegian Consumer rights organization "ForbrukerrĂĽdet" complained to Apple Inc. in 2007 about the company's use of DRM in, and in conjunction with, its iPod and iTunes products. Apple was accused Defective by Design member protesting DRM on May 25, 2007. of restricting users' access to their music and videos in an unlawful way, and of using EULAs which conflict with Norwegian consumer legislation. The complaint was supported by consumers' ombudsmen in Sweden and Denmark, and is currently being reviewed in the EU. Similarly, the United States Federal Trade Commission held hearings in March 2009 to review disclosure of DRM limitations to customers' use of media products.[72] The use of DRM may also be a barrier to future historians, since technologies designed to permit data to be read only on particular machines, or with particular keys, or for certain periods, may well make future data recovery impossible â&#x20AC;&#x201D; see Digital Revolution. DRM opponents argue that the presence of DRM violates existing private property rights and restricts a range of heretofore normal and legal user activities. A DRM component would control a device a user owns (such as a Digital audio player) by restricting how it may act with regards to certain content, overriding some of the user's wishes (for example, preventing the user from burning a copyrighted song to CD as part of a compilation or a review). An example of this effect may be seen in Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system in which content using a Protected Media Path is disabled or degraded depending on the DRM scheme's evaluation of whether the hardware and its use are 'secure'.[73] All forms of DRM depend on the DRM enabled device (e.g., computer, DVD player, TV) imposing restrictions that (at least by intent) cannot be disabled or modified by the user. Key issues around digital rights management such as the right to make personal copies, provisions for persons to lend copies to friends, provisions for service discontinuance, hardware agnosticism, software and operating system agnosticism,[74] contracts for public libraries, and customersÂ´ protection against one-side amendments of the contract by the publisher have not been fully addressed.(see references 80-89) It has also been pointed out that it is entirely unclear whether owners of content with DRM are legally permitted to pass on their property as inheritance to another person.[75] Tools like FairUse4WM have been created to strip Windows Media of DRM restrictions.[76] Valve Corporation President Gabe Newell also stated "most DRM strategies are just dumb" because they only decrease the value of a game in the consumer's eyes. Newell's suggests combating piracy by "[creating] greater value for customers through service value".[77]

Digital rights management

"DRM-Free" Due to the strong opposition that exists to DRM, many companies and artists have begun advertising their products as "DRM-Free".[78] [79] [80] Apple began selling "DRM-Free" music through their iTunes store in April 2007.[81] It was later revealed that the DRM-Free iTunes files were still embedded with each user's account information, a technique called Digital watermarking generally less restrictive. In January 2009, iTunes began marketing all of their songs as "DRM-Free",[82] however iTunes continues to use DRM on movies, TV shows, ringtones, and audiobooks.[83]

Impossible task Bruce Schneier has written about the futility of digital copy prevention and says it's an impossible task. He says "What the entertainment industry is trying to do is to use technology to contradict that natural law. They want a practical way to make copying hard enough to save their existing business. But they are doomed to fail."[84] He has also described trying to make digital files uncopyable as being like "trying to make water not wet".[85] The creators of StarForce also take this stance, stating that "The purpose of copy protection is not making the game uncrackable it is impossible." [86] Both the Association for Computing Machinery and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers have historically opposed DRM, even going so far as to name AACS as a technology "most likely to fail" in an issue of IEEE Spectrum.[87]

Shortcomings Methods to bypass DRM There are many methods to bypass DRM control on audio and video content. One simple method to bypass DRM on audio files is to burn the content to an audio CD and then rip it into DRM-free files. This is only possible when the software that plays these DRM-restricted audio files allows CD-burning. Some software products simplify and automate this burn-rip process by allowing the user to burn music to a CD-RW disc or to a Virtual CD-R drive, then automatically ripping and encoding the music, and automatically repeating this process until all selected music has been converted, rather than forcing the user to do this one CD (72â&#x20AC;&#x201C;80 minutes worth of music) at a time. Many software programs have been developed that intercept the data stream as it is decrypted out of the DRM-restricted file, and then use this data to construct a DRM-free file. These programs require a decryption key. Programs that do this for DVDs, HD DVDs, and Blu-ray Discs include universal decryption keys in the software itself. Programs that do this for TiVo ToGo recordings, iTunes audio, and PlaysForSure songs, however, rely on the user's own key â&#x20AC;&#x201D; that is, they can only process content that the user has legally acquired under his or her own account. Another method is to use software to record the signals being sent through the audio or video cards, or to plug analog recording devices into the analog outputs of the media player. These techniques utilize the so-called "analog hole" (see below).

Analog hole All forms of DRM for audio and visual material (excluding interactive materials, e.g. videogames) are subject to the analog hole, namely that in order for a viewer to play the material, the digital signal must be turned into an analog signal containing light and/or sound for the viewer, and so available to be copied as no DRM is capable of controlling content in this form. In other words, a user could play a purchased audio file while using a separate program to record the sound back into the computer into a DRM-free file format.

Digital rights management All DRM to date can therefore be bypassed by recording this signal and digitally storing and distributing it in a non DRM limited form, by anyone who has the technical means of recording the analog stream. However the conversion from digital to analog and back is likely to force a loss of quality, particularly when using lossy digital formats. HDCP is an attempt to restrict the analog hole, although it is largely ineffective.[88] [89] Asus released a soundcard which features a function called "Analog Loopback Transformation" to bypass the restrictions of DRM. This feature allows the user to record DRM-restricted audio via the soundcard's built-in analog I/O connection.[90] [91]

DRM on general computing platforms Many of the DRM systems in use are designed to work on general purpose computing hardware, such as desktop PCs apparently because this equipment is felt to be a major contributor to revenue loss from disallowed copying. Large commercial copyright infringers ("pirates") avoid consumer equipment, so losses from such infringers will not be covered by such provisions. Such schemes, especially software based ones, can never be wholly secure since the software must include all the information necessary to decrypt the content, such as the decryption keys. An attacker will be able to extract this information, directly decrypt and copy the content, which bypasses the restrictions imposed by a DRM system.[62]

DRM on purpose-built hardware Many DRM schemes use encrypted media which requires purpose-built hardware to hear or see the content. This appears to ensure that only licensed users (those with the hardware) can access the content. It additionally tries to protect a secret decryption key from the users of the system. While this in principle can work, it is extremely difficult to build the hardware to protect the secret key against a sufficiently determined adversary. Many such systems have failed in the field. Once the secret key is known, building a version of the hardware that performs no checks is often relatively straightforward. In addition user verification provisions are frequently subject to attack, pirate decryption being among the most frequented ones. A common real-world example can be found in commercial direct broadcast satellite television systems such as DirecTV and Malaysia's Astro. The company uses tamper-resistant smart cards to store decryption keys so that they are hidden from the user and the satellite receiver. However, the system has been compromised in the past, and DirecTV has been forced to roll out periodic updates and replacements for its smart cards.

Watermarks Watermarks can very typically be removed, although degradation of video or audio can occur.

Mass piracy failure Mass piracy of hard copies does not necessarily need DRM to be decrypted or removed, as it can be achieved by bit-perfect copying of a legally obtained medium without accessing the decrypted content. Additionally, still-encrypted disk images can be distributed over the Internet and played on legitimately licensed players.

Obsolescence When standards and formats change, it may be difficult to transfer DRM-restricted content to new media. Additionally, any system that requires contact with an authentication server is vulnerable to that server becoming unavailable, as happened[92] in 2007 when videos purchased from Major League Baseball (mlb.com) prior to 2006 became unplayable due to a change to the servers that validate the licenses. Amazon PDF and LIT ebooks - In August 2006, Amazon stopped selling DRMed PDF and .LIT format ebooks. Customers were unable to download purchased ebooks 30 days after that date, losing access to their purchased

Digital rights management content on new devices.[93] [94] Microsoft Zune - When Microsoft introduced their Zune[95] media player in 2006, it did not support content that uses Microsoft's own PlaysForSure DRM scheme they had previously been selling. The EFF calls this "a raw deal".[96] MSN Music - In April 2008, Microsoft sent an email to former customers of the now-defunct MSN Music store: "As of August 31, 2008, we will no longer be able to support the retrieval of license keys for the songs you purchased from MSN Music or the authorization of additional computers. You will need to obtain a license key for each of your songs downloaded from MSN Music on any new computer, and you must do so before August 31, 2008. If you attempt to transfer your songs to additional computers after August 31, 2008, those songs will not successfully play."[97] However, to avoid a public relations disaster, Microsoft re-issued MSN Music shutdown statement on June 19th and allowed the users to use their licenses until the end of 2011: "After careful consideration, Microsoft has decided to continue to support the authorization of new computers and devices and delivery of new license keys for MSN Music customers through at least the end of 2011, after which we will evaluate how much this functionality is still being used and what steps should be taken next to support our customers. This means you will continue to be able to listen to your purchased music and transfer your music to new PCs and devices beyond the previously announced August 31, 2008 date."[98] Yahoo! Music Store - On July 23, 2008, the Yahoo! Music Store emailed its customers to tell them it will be shutting down effective September 30, 2008 and the DRM license key servers will be taken offline.[99] Walmart - In August 2007, Walmart's online music division started offering (DRM-free) MP3s as an option. Starting in February 2008, they made all sales DRM-free. On September 26, 2008, the Walmart Music Team notified its customers via email they will be shutting down their DRM servers October 9, 2008 and any DRM-encumbered music acquired from them will no longer be accessible unless ripped to a non-DRM format before that date.[100] After bad press and negative reaction from customers, on October 9, 2008, Walmart decided not to take its DRM servers offline. [101] Fictionwise / Overdrive - In January 2009, OverDrive informed Fictionwise that they would no longer be providing downloads for purchasers of e-books through Fictionwise as of 31 January 2009. No reason was provided to Fictionwise as to why they were being shut down. This prevents previous purchasers from being able to renew their books on new devices.[102] Fictionwise is working to provide replacement ebooks for its customers in alternative, non-DRM formats, but does not have the rights to provide all of the books in different formats.[102] Ads for Adobe PDF - Also in January 2009, Adobe Systems announced that as of March 2009 they would no longer operate the servers that served ads to their PDF reader. Depending on the restriction settings used when PDF documents were created, they may no longer be readable.[103] Adobe Content Server 3 for Adobe PDF - In April 2009, Adobe Systems announced that as of March 30, 2009 the Adobe Content 3 server would no longer activate new installations of Adobe Reader or Adobe Acrobat. In addition, the ability to migrate content from Adobe Content Server 3 to Adobe Content Server 4 would cease from mid-December 2009. Anyone who failed to migrate their DRMed PDF files during this nine month window lost access to their content the next time they had to re-install their copy of Adobe Reader or Adobe Acrobat.[104] Harper Collins ebook store - In November 2010, Harper Collins announced that as of November 19, 2010, their eBook Store was discontinued, and advised all customers to download and archive their purchases before December 19, 2010, when purchased titles would no longer be accessible. Loss of access to Mobipocket ebooks on new devices. [105] CyberRead ebook store - In February 2011, CyberRead announced that they were closing down, and advised all customers to download and archive their purchases. Loss of access to Mobipocket ebooks on new devices. [106]

Digital rights management

Moral and Legitimacy Implications 1. One of the principles of the Rule of Law is that "The law can be readily determined and is stable enough to allow individuals to plan their affairs." [107] 2. A problem with DRM that EFF point to is: ".. in an effort to attract customers, these music services try to obscure the restrictions they impose on you with clever marketing." [108] 3. DRM laws are widely flouted: according to Australia Official Music Chart Survey, music theft from all causes is practiced by millions of people. [109] That is, the law, or in this case, the contract between the user and seller, cannot be readily determined, and is widely broken. These facts reduce the ability of a law-abiding person to both detect when they've broken the law, and to feel a moral obligation to abide by DRM contract and law. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Is burning a music CD breaking the law? Is giving a CD I've purchased to a friend breaking the law? Is burning a CD, and then giving it to a friend, breaking the law? Is purchasing a CD, and listening to it, and then returning it to the store for resale breaking the law? Is purchasing, burning a CD, and then returning it to the store for resale breaking the law?

The answers to these questions are non-obvious, which breaks one of the fundamental principles of the Rule of Law listed above. [110]

Not all piracy is undesirable to digital rights holders Microsoft has stated that if someone is going to steal software, they want it to be their software they steal. [111] There can be real benefits to software makers to theft, since the unit cost of digital theft is zero, or near-zero, and their belief is that some software pirates will become trained in their software and eventually pay for it. An analogous argument was made in an early paper by Kathleen Conner and Richard Rummelt.[112] A subsequent study of digital rights management for ebooks by Gal Oestreicher-Singer and Arun Sundararajan showed that relaxing some forms of DRM can be beneficial to digital rights holders because the losses from piracy are outweighed by the increases in value to legal buyers.[113]

Business Model Ideas Music is the prominent copy written material illegally downloaded from the Internet. The fairly new technology has given the public access to resources that were difficult to obtain before. Due to the Internet, businesses must consider innovative ideas to prevent people from illegally downloading materials. Music is illegally downloaded because the files are small, products can be easily duplicated, and younger people have the resources and knowledge to manipulate the system [114] . One way to prevent illegal downloading is to have technical protection schemes, which includes using encryption or limiting the number of computers a file can be shared on. The second way to prevent illegal file sharing is to change the business model [115] .

Easy and Cheap The first business model to prevent from illegal file sharing is to make the downloading easy and cheap. The use of a noncommercial site makes downloading music complex. If someone misspells the artistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s name, the search will leave the consumer dissatisfied. Also, some illegal file sharing websites lead to many viruses that attach themselves to the files. Some sites limit the traffic, which can make downloading a song a long and frustrating process. If the songs are all provided on one site, and reasonably prices, consumers will purchase the music legally to overcome the frustrations that can occur downloading illegally. [116]

Digital rights management

Digital Content to Promote Traditional Product Many artists are using the Internet to give away music to create awareness and liking to a new upcoming album. The artists release a new song on the internet for free download, which consumers can download. The hope is to have the listeners buy the new album because of the free download [117] . A common practice used today is releasing a song or two on the internet for consumers to indulge. In 2007, Radiohead released an album named In Rainbows, in which fans could pay any amount they want, or download it for free.[118] The disadvantage to giving away a new single on an album is that it may discourage the consumers from buying the whole album.

Disintermediation and Give it Away Artists make most of their revenue through performing concerts. While album sales do increase their wealth, artists do not completely rely on the sales for their salary. The business model of disintermediation means to eliminate the middlemen. A person can purchase songs and albums via the internet. There would be no communication between the consumer and a store. Another option is to give all the music away. The artists will not lose many profits from album sales, and the music will still be wide spread. The main disadvantage to giving away music for free is that the record labels may not allow it. Record labels sign artists and handle the promotion and marketing of the artist. The sales of albums act as a source of revenue to the labels, which from a business perspective, will decrease their profits.[119]

The Artistic Freedom Voucher The Artistic Freedom Voucher (AFV) introduced by Dean Baker is a way for consumers to support “creative and artistic work.” In this system, each consumer would have a refundable tax credit of $100 to give to any artist of creative work. To restrict fraud, the artists must register with the government. The voucher prohibits any artist that receives the benefits from copyrighting their material for a certain length of time. Consumers can obtain music for a certain amount of time easily and the consumer decides which artists receive the $100. The money can either be given to one artist or to many, the distribution is up to the consumer.[120]

Historical note A very early implementation of DRM was the Software Service System (SSS) devised by the Japanese engineer Ryoichi Mori in 1983 [121] and subsequently refined under the name superdistribution. The SSS was based on encryption, with specialized hardware that controlled decryption and also enabled payments to be sent to the copyright holder. The underlying principle of the SSS and subsequently of superdistribution was that the distribution of encrypted digital products should be completely unrestricted and that users of those products would not just be permitted to redistribute them but would actually be encouraged to do so.

References [1] Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 112 Stat. 2863, 17 U.S. Code 1201-1205. [2] "Images and the Internet" (http:/ / www. artistscope. com/ protection. asp). . [3] Christopher Levy (February 3, 2003). "Making Money with Streaming Media" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20060514024614/ http:/ / www. streamingmedia. com/ r/ printerfriendly. asp?id=8306). streamingmedia.com. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. streamingmedia. com/ r/ printerfriendly. asp?id=8306) on 2006-05-14. . Retrieved 2006-08-28. [4] https:/ / www. eff. org/ issues/ drm [5] http:/ / www. cbc. ca/ news/ technology/ story/ 2009/ 08/ 06/ tech-digital-locks-drm-tpm-rights-management-protection-measures-copyright-copy-protection. html [6] (http:/ / www. defectivebydesign. org/ what_is_drm) [7] "Digital Restrictions Management and Treacherous Computing" (http:/ / www. fsf. org/ campaigns/ drm. html). . Retrieved 2006-08-04. [8] http:/ / w2. eff. org/ IP/ DRM/ fair_use_and_drm. html [9] "FairPlay: Another Anti-competitive Use of DRM" (http:/ / www. eff. org/ deeplinks/ archives/ 001557. php). . Retrieved 2006-08-01. [10] "Digital Restrictions Management" (http:/ / drm. info). Archived from the original (http:/ / drm. info/ ) on 2011-02-13. .

Digital rights management

[11] MediaDaily News, “QuickPlay Distributes TV Over Mobile Wi-Fi” November 12, 2009 (http:/ / www. mediapost. com/ publications/ ?fa=Articles. showArticle& art_aid=117244) [12] Bangeman, Eric (2006-10-28). "TiVo tightens the DRM vise" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ news. ars/ post/ 20041028-4358. html). . Retrieved 2006-08-11. [13] “Digital Rights Management (DRM) Systems and Copy Protection Schemes,” http:/ / www. eff. org/ IP/ DRM [14] Kranich, Nancy. "Chap 1(pg.8)." The Information Commons. Creative Commons, 2004. Print. [15] Xeni Jardin (2006-12-28). "Report: HD-DVD copy protection defeated" (http:/ / www. boingboing. net/ 2006/ 12/ 28/ report-hddvd-copy-pr. html). BoingBoing. . Retrieved 2008-01-01. [16] Cory Doctorow (2007-05-30). "New AACS processing key leaks onto the net" (http:/ / www. boingboing. net/ 2007/ 05/ 30/ new-aacs-processing-. html). BoingBoing. . Retrieved 2008-01-01. [17] "Who Controls Your Television?" (http:/ / w2. eff. org/ IP/ DVB/ dvb_briefing_paper. php). Electronic Frontier Foundation. . Retrieved 2008-01-01. [18] Lewis, Rita (January 8, 2008). "What is DRM and Why Should I Care?" (http:/ / firefox. org/ news/ articles/ 1045/ 1/ What-is-DRM-and-why-should-I-care/ Page1. html). Firefox News. . Retrieved July 10, 2008. [19] McMillan, Robert (May 23, 2006). Article "Settlement Ends Sony Rootkit Case" (http:/ / www. pcworld. com/ article/ id,125838-page,1-c,unresolvedtechstandards/ article. html). PC World. Article. Retrieved April 8, 2007. [20] Marechal, Sander (January 9, 2007). "DRM on audio CDs abolished" (http:/ / lxer. com/ module/ newswire/ view/ 78008/ index. html). . [21] Holahan, Catherine (January 4, 2008). "Sony BMG Plans to Drop DRM" (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/ technology/ content/ jan2008/ tc2008013_398775. htm). . [22] "iTunes Plus DRM-free tracks expanding, dropping to 99 cents" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ journals/ apple. ars/ 2007/ 10/ 15/ itunes-plus-drm-free-tracks-expanding-dropping-to-99-cents). Apple News from ARS Technica. 2007-10-16. . Retrieved 2007-10-16.

[23] Nick Timeraos (July 6, 2006). "Free, Legal and Ignored" (http:/ / online. wsj. com/ public/ article/ SB115214899486099107-vuoIhGUthiYcFwsQK0DjegSRPwQ_20070706. html). WSJ.com (Wall Street Journal). . Retrieved 2006-11-27. [24] Eric Bangeman (December 6, 2006). "Testing DRM-free waters: EMI selling a few MP3s through Yahoo Music" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ news. ars/ post/ 20061206-8368. html). Ars Technica. . [25] Steve Jobs. "Thoughts on Music" (http:/ / www. apple. com/ hotnews/ thoughtsonmusic/ ). . [26] Ken Fisher (March 18, 2007). "Musicload: 75% of customer service problems caused by DRM" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ news. ars/ post/ 20070318-75-percent-customer-problems-caused-by-drm. html). Ars Technica. . Retrieved 2007-03-20. [27] Ernesto (September 13, 2008). "Spore: Most Pirated Game Ever Thanks to DRM" (http:/ / torrentfreak. com/ spore-most-pirated-game-ever-thanks-to-drm-080913/ ). TorrentFreak. . Retrieved 2008-12-06. [28] Andy Greenberg; Mary Jane Irwin (2008-09-12). "Spore's Piracy Problem" (http:/ / www. forbes. com/ technology/ 2008/ 09/ 12/ spore-drm-piracy-tech-security-cx_ag_mji_0912spore. html). Forbes. . Retrieved 2008-12-06. [29] Kuchera, Ben (2008-12-12). "PC Prince of Persia contains no DRM. It's a trap!" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ gaming/ news/ 2008/ 12/ pc-prince-of-persia-contains-no-drm-its-a-trap. ars). Arstechnica.com. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [30] "The Sims 3 Will Not Use DRM: News from" (http:/ / www. 1up. com/ do/ newsStory?cId=3173495). 1UP.com. 2009-03-29. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [31] Ubisoft (February 9, 2010). "Ubisoft Press Release" (http:/ / www. ubisoftgroup. com/ index. php?p=59& art_id=60& vars=Y29tX2lkPTczMCZzZW5kZXI9SE9NRSZzZW5kZXJfdXJsPWluZGV4LnBocCUzRnR5cGUlM0RlcnJvciUyNmJvX2FjdGlvbiUzRGVycm9yX2RhdGFiY Ubisoft. . Retrieved 2010-03-04. [32] Nic Simmonds (March 4, 2010). "Ubisoft’s contentious DRM scheme already hacked" (http:/ / www. mygaming. co. za/ news/ pc/ 5515-Ubisofts-contentious-DRM-scheme-already-hacked. html). MyGaming. . Retrieved 2010-03-04. [33] Andy Chalk (March 4, 2010). "Ubisoft Denies Launch Day Crack for Silent Hunter 5 DRM" (http:/ / www. escapistmagazine. com/ news/ view/ 98843-Ubisoft-Denies-Launch-Day-Crack-for-Silent-Hunter-5-DRM). Escapist Magazine. . Retrieved 2010-03-27. [34] Ben Kuchera (February 18, 2010). "Official explanation of controversial Assassin's Creed 2 DRM" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ gaming/ news/ 2010/ 02/ ubisoft-details-drm. ars). Escapist Magazine. . Retrieved 2010-03-27. [35] "Ubisoft's DRM for Assassin's Creed II is Cracked" (http:/ / www. tomshardware. com/ news/ assassins-creed-crack-hack-drm-ac2,10260. html). Tomshardware.com. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [36] Lowensohn, Josh. "Ubisoft's controversial 'always on' PC DRM hacked | Web Crawler - CNET News" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ 8301-27076_3-20003120-248. html). News.cnet.com. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [37] John Leyden (March 8, 2010). "Ubisoft undone by anti-DRM DDoS storm" (http:/ / www. theregister. co. uk/ 2010/ 03/ 08/ ubisoft_anti_drm_hack_attack/ ). The Register. . Retrieved 2010-03-27. [38] Andre Yoskowitz (March 8, 2010). "Ubisoft apologizes to users affected by 'always on' DRM" (http:/ / www. afterdawn. com/ news/ article. cfm/ 2010/ 03/ 26/ ubisoft_apologizes_to_users_affected_by_always_on_drm). Afterdawn. . Retrieved 2010-03-27. [39] TinHat (June 2006). "eBooks and Digital Rights Management (DRM), for ePublishers" (http:/ / www. tinhat. com/ ebooks_epublishing/ epublishers_drm. html). tinhat.com. . Retrieved 2008-05-28. [40] Karen Coyle (November 19, 2003). "The Technology of Rights: Digital Rights Management" (http:/ / www. kcoyle. net/ drm_basics. pdf) (PDF). . Retrieved 2008-05-26. [41] Ed Foster (February 19, 2004). "E-Books and DRM" (http:/ / www. gripe2ed. com/ scoop/ story/ 2004/ 2/ 19/ 0515/ 77045=). Info World. . Retrieved 2008-05-26.

Digital rights management [42] Jon Noring (2004). "The Perils of DRM Overkill for Large Publishers" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20080403175200/ http:/ / www. teleread. org/ publishersdrm. htm). Archived from the original (http:/ / www. teleread. org/ publishersdrm. htm) on 2008-04-03. . Retrieved 2008-05-26. [43] Stone, Brad (2009-07-18). "Amazon Erases Orwell Books From Kindle Devices" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 07/ 18/ technology/ companies/ 18amazon. html). New York Times. . Retrieved 2010-05-01. [44] David Pogue (2009-07-17). "Some E-Books Are More Equal Than Others" (http:/ / pogue. blogs. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 07/ 17/ some-e-books-are-more-equal-than-others/ ). New York Times. . [45] Pete Cashmore (July 17, 2009). "Big Brother: Amazon Remotely Deletes 1984 From Kindles" (http:/ / mashable. com/ 2009/ 07/ 17/ amazon-kindle-1984/ ). . [46] Mark Frauenfelder (July 17, 2009). "Amazon zaps purchased copies of Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm from Kindles" (http:/ / boingboing. net/ 2009/ 07/ 17/ amazon-zaps-purchase. html). . [47] Ina Fried (July 17, 2009). "Amazon recalls (and embodies) Orwell's '1984'" (http:/ / news. cnet. com/ 8301-13860_3-10289983-56. html). . [48] Free Software Foundation (July 23, 2009). "Amazon's CEO Jeff Bezos apologizes for Kindle ebook deletion. Free Software Foundation calls upon Amazon to free the ebook reader." (http:/ / www. fsf. org/ news/ amazon-apologizes). . [49] "Why Amazon went Big Brother on some Kindle e-books" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ tech-policy/ news/ 2009/ 07/ amazon-sold-pirated-books-raided-some-kindles. ars). arstechnica.com. July 17, 2009. . [50] ""DRM vs. ERM: Battle to Control Data", Network World" (http:/ / www. networkworld. com/ news/ tech/ 2006/ 121806techupdate. html). . Retrieved 2008-04-02. [51] "Tunes Plus DRM-free, not free of annoying glitches" (http:/ / www. engadget. com/ 2007/ 05/ 31/ itunes-plus-drm-free-not-free-of-annoying-glitches/ ). Engadget. . [52] "Watermarked iTunes files" (http:/ / playlistmag. com/ weblogs/ ipodblog/ 2007/ 06/ ituneswatermark/ index. php). Macworld. . [53] Doctorow, Cory (2007-03-24). "DMCA's author says the DMCA is a failure, blames record industry" (http:/ / boingboing. net/ 2007/ 03/ 24/ dmcas_author_says_th. html). . Retrieved 2011-01-12. [54] "RIAA challenges SDMI attack" (http:/ / cryptome. org/ sdmi-attack. htm). 2002-01-07. . Retrieved 2007-02-26. [55] "W3C Workshop - Digital Rights Management for the Web" (http:/ / www. w3. org/ 2000/ 12/ drm-ws/ Overview. html). W3.org. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [56] (http:/ / www. cenorm. be/ cenorm/ businessdomains/ businessdomains/ isss/ activity/ drm_fg. asp) [57] "European Commission - Information Society - eEurope 2005 - eEurope 2005 Action Plan" (http:/ / ec. europa. eu/ information_society/ eeurope/ 2005/ all_about/ digital_rights_man/ index_en. htm). Ec.europa.eu. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [58] "The address you requested is obsolete" (http:/ / europa. eu. int/ comm/ internal_market/ copyright/ management/ management_en. htm). Europa.eu.int. 2009-02-23. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [59] Walker, John (September 13, 2003). "The Digital Imprimatur: How big brother and big media can put the Internet genie back in the bottle." (http:/ / www. fourmilab. ch/ documents/ digital-imprimatur/ ). . [60] Richard Stallman. "The Right to Read" (http:/ / www. gnu. org/ philosophy/ right-to-read. html). . [61] O'Riordan, Ciaran (January 16, 2006). "Transcript of Opening session of first international GPLv3 conference" (http:/ / www. ifso. ie/ documents/ gplv3-launch-2006-01-16. html). . [62] Cory Doctorow (June 17, 2004). "Microsoft Research DRM Talk" (http:/ / www. changethis. com/ 4. DRM) (PDF). craphound.com. . Retrieved 2007-08-17. ""At the end of the day, all DRM systems share a common vulnerability: they provide their attackers with ciphertext, the cipher and the key. At this point,the secret isn't a secret anymore."" [63] http:/ / techmediums. com/ 2008/ 04/ 02/ drm-what-drm-what-the-heck-are-copyright-holders-going-to-focus-on-now/ [64] "The Attention Economy and the Net" (http:/ / www. firstmonday. org/ issues/ issue2_4/ goldhaber/ #dep18). . Retrieved 28-July-2008. [65] "Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU Licenses - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation" (http:/ / www. fsf. org/ licensing/ licenses/ gpl-faq. html#DRMProhibited). FSF. 2010-07-28. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [66] "The Campaign to Eliminate DRM" (http:/ / www. defectivebydesign. org/ ). DefectiveByDesign.org. . Retrieved 2010-08-31. [67] "Frequently Asked Questions - CcWiki" (http:/ / wiki. creativecommons. org/ FAQ#Is_Creative_Commons_involved_in_digital_rights_management_. 28DRM. 29. 3F). 2006-11-09. . Retrieved 2006-11-22. [68] "Baseline Rights - Creative Commons Wiki" (http:/ / wiki. creativecommons. org/ Baseline_Rights). 2007-07-13. . Retrieved 2007-12-23. [69] "Bill Gates On The Future Of DRM." (http:/ / www. techcrunch. com/ 2006/ 12/ 14/ bill-gates-on-the-future-of-drm/ ). . [70] apple.com (2009-01-06). "Changes Coming to the iTunes Store" (http:/ / www. apple. com/ pr/ library/ 2009/ 01/ 06itunes. html). . Retrieved 2009-03-08. [71] "A lot of CRAP" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20060828145106/ http:/ / news. zdnet. com/ 2036-2_22-6035707. html). Archived from the original (http:/ / news. zdnet. com/ 2036-2_22-6035707. html) on 2006-08-28. . Retrieved 2006-09-07. [72] "FTC Town Hall to Address Digital Rights Management Technologies" (https:/ / secure. commentworks. com/ ftc-DRMtechnologies/ ). Federal Trade Commission. . Retrieved 2009-01-15. [73] "What Content Will Be Crippled When Output in Vista?" (http:/ / msmvps. com/ blogs/ chrisl/ archive/ 2007/ 01/ 25/ 519180. aspx). . Retrieved 2010-09-08. [74] "Why is Netflix ignoring Linux?" (http:/ / wesleytech. com/ why-is-netflix-ignoring-linux/ 2072/ ). . Retrieved 2010-09-08. [75] Why the Kindleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s DRM is anti-elderly: AARP should fight against it (http:/ / www. teleread. org/ 2009/ 02/ 26/ why-the-kindles-drm-is-anti-elderly-and-perhaps-even-a-target-for-an-aarp-campaign-against-it/ ), February 26, 2009

Digital rights management [76] "Engadget FairUse4WM strips Windows Media DRM!" (http:/ / www. engadget. com/ 2006/ 08/ 25/ fairuse4wm-strips-windows-media-drm). . Retrieved 2006-08-25. [77] "Gabe Newell Says DRM Strategies 'Are Just Dumb'" (http:/ / www. 1up. com/ do/ newsStory?cId=3171588). 2008-12-02. . [78] "Amazon website advertising "AmazonMP3; Play Anywhere DRM-Free Music Downloads"" (http:/ / www. amazon. com/ MP3-Music-Download/ b?ie=UTF8& node=163856011). . Retrieved 2008-09-13. [79] "Nine Inch Nails album Ghosts I-IV advertised as "100% DRM-Free"" (http:/ / ghosts. nin. com/ images/ popup_product_5download. jpg). . Retrieved 2008-09-13. [80] "Talking To Pirates; Game developer pledges never to use DRM" (http:/ / www. positech. co. uk/ talkingtopirates. html). . Retrieved 2008-09-13. [81] "Apple Unveils Higher Quality DRM-Free Music on the iTunes Store" (http:/ / www. apple. com/ pr/ library/ 2007/ 04/ 02itunes. html). . Retrieved 2008-09-13. [82] "Apple hides account info in DRM-free music, too" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ news. ars/ post/ 20070530-apple-hides-account-info-in-drm-free-music-too. html). . Retrieved 2008-09-13. [83] "Apple announces all music on iTunes to go DRM-free -- no word on movies, TV shows, games, audiobooks and applications" (http:/ / www. defectivebydesign. org/ itunes-drm-free). 2009-01-08. . [84] The Futility of Digital Copy Prevention (http:/ / www. schneier. com/ crypto-gram-0105. html#3) Crypto-Gram Newsletter, May 15, 2001 [85] Bruce Schneier (09.07.06). "Quickest Patch Ever" (http:/ / www. wired. com/ politics/ security/ commentary/ securitymatters/ 2006/ 09/ 71738). Wired. . Retrieved 2010-02-15. [86] "Official words of StarForce on DRM" (http:/ / www. glop. org/ starforce/ images/ starforce-official-words. png). . Retrieved 2010-09-08. [87] Tekla S. Perry (January 2007). "Loser: DVD Copy Protection, Take 2" (http:/ / www. spectrum. ieee. org/ jan05/ 2703). Spectrum Online. . Retrieved 2007-05-04. [88] "MPAA shows how to videorecord a TV set" (http:/ / vimeo. com/ 4520463). . Retrieved 2009-09-04. [89] Security and Privacy in Digital Rights Management (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?hl=en& lr=& id=GzN3ohNNPDgC& oi=fnd& pg=PA192& ots=bF8iXjPRSX& sig=ba1KxQPskkZqJ-S3hqBGS8opoZI#v=onepage& q=& f=false). . Retrieved 2009-09-04. [90] "Asus Showcases New Generation Audio Card at Computex 2007" (http:/ / www. asus. com/ news_show. aspx?id=7319). . Retrieved 2007-06-26. [91] PC Pro Product Reviews Asus Xonar D2 (http:/ / www. pcpro. co. uk/ reviews/ 121497/ asus-xonar-d2. html) [92] "MLB Fans Who Bought DRM Videos Get Hosed" (http:/ / yro. slashdot. org/ article. pl?sid=07/ 11/ 07/ 2014253). slashdot.org. November 7, 2007. . Retrieved 2007-11-08. [93] "Amazon Drops Lit/Pdf eBooks" (http:/ / www. mobileread. com/ forums/ showthread. php?threadid=7223). Mobileread. August 4, 2006. . Retrieved 2011-03-22. [94] Hancock, Georganna (September 17, 2006). "Amazon Drops eBooks" (http:/ / www. writers-edge. info/ 2006/ 09/ amazon-drops-ebooks. htm). . Retrieved 2011-03-22.} [95] "Zune Won't Play Old DRM Infected Files" (http:/ / yro. slashdot. org/ article. pl?sid=06/ 09/ 19/ 1342256). slashdot.org. September 19, 2006. . Retrieved 2007-09-19. [96] Slater, Derek (September 15, 2006). "Microsoft's Zune Won't Play Protected Windows Media" (http:/ / www. eff. org/ deeplinks/ archives/ 004910. php). Electronic Frontier Foundation. . Retrieved 2008-09-27. [97] Cheng, Jacqui (April 22, 2008). "DRM sucks redux: Microsoft to nuke MSN Music DRM keys" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ news. ars/ post/ 20080422-drm-sucks-redux-microsoft-to-nuke-msn-music-drm-keys. html). Ars Technica. . Retrieved 2008-04-22. [98] Thurrott, Paul (June 19, 2008). "MSN Music Store Support Notification" (http:/ / community. winsupersite. com/ blogs/ paul/ archive/ 2008/ 06/ 19/ msn-music-store-support-notification. aspx). Winsupersite. . Retrieved 2008-06-19. [99] Anderson, Nate (July 24, 2008). "DRM still sucks: Yahoo Music going dark, taking keys with it" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ news. ars/ post/ 20080724-drm-still-sucks-yahoo-music-going-dark-taking-keys-with-it. html). Ars Technica. . Retrieved 2008-07-26. [100] Doctorow, Cory (September 26, 2008). "Wal*Mart shutting down DRM server, nuking your music collection--only people who pay for music risk losing it to DRM shenanigans" (http:/ / www. boingboing. net/ 2008/ 09/ 26/ walmart-shutting-dow. html). Boing Boing. . Retrieved 2008-09-26. [101] Murph, Darren (October 10, 2008). "Walmart has a change of heart, decides to maintain DRM servers" (http:/ / www. engadget. com/ 2008/ 10/ 10/ walmart-has-a-change-of-heart-decides-to-maintain-drm-servers/ ). Weblogs, Inc.. . Retrieved 2008-10-10. [102] "Fictionwise Support FAQ" (http:/ / www. fictionwise. com/ help/ Overdrive-Replacement-FAQ. htm). . Retrieved 8 January 2009. [103] "Ads for AdobePDF discontinued" (http:/ / www. mobileread. com/ forums/ showthread. php?t=36260). . Retrieved 2009-01-15. [104] "Adobe Content 3 Server Discontinued" (http:/ / kb2. adobe. com/ cps/ 409/ kb409073. html). . Retrieved 2011-02-22. [105] "HarperCollins ebook Store Discontinued" (http:/ / www. teleread. com/ paul-biba/ harpercollins-closes-ebookstore-nobody-knew-about/ ). . Retrieved 2011-02-23. [106] "CyberRead ebook Store Discontinued" (http:/ / www. mobileread. com/ forums/ showthread. php?t=123485). . Retrieved 2011-02-23. [107] "The Rule of Law Problem" (http:/ / www. greenbag. org/ v12n3/ v12n3_nachbar. pdf). . Retrieved 2011-02-06. [108] "The Customer Is Always Wrong" (http:/ / www. eff. org/ pages/ customer-always-wrong-users-guide-drm-online-music). . Retrieved 2011-02-06. [109] "Australia Recording industry Association Survey, 2003" (http:/ / www. aria. com. au/ pages/ CurrentIssueInternetMusicFileSharingCDBurning. htm). . Retrieved 2011-02-05.

Digital rights management [110] "Is selling burned CDs legal?" (http:/ / wiki. answers. com/ Q/ Is_selling_burned_CDs_legal). . Retrieved 2011-02-06. [111] "Microsoft executive: Pirating software? Choose Microsoft!" (http:/ / arstechnica. com/ microsoft/ news/ 2007/ 03/ microsoft-executive-pirating-software-choose-microsoft. ars). . Retrieved 2011-02-06. [112] Conner, Kathleen and Richard Rummelt (1991). "Software Piracy: An Analysis of Protection Strategies" (http:/ / www. jstor. org/ stable/ 2632386). Management Science 37 (2). . [113] Oestreicher-Singer, Gal and Arun Sundararajan (2004). "Are Digital Rights Valuable? Theory and Evidence from the eBook Industry" (http:/ / aisel. aisnet. org/ icis2004/ 42/ ). Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems. . [114] Folbre, Nancy. (2011). The Information and Cultural Commons [PowerPoint slides] [115] Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Emerging Information Infrastructure, National Research Council. (2000) "The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual Property in the Information Age." 3 May 2011. http:/ / www. nap. edu/ catalog. php?record_id=9601#toc [116] Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Emerging Information Infrastructure, National Research Council. (2000) "The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual Property in the Information Age." 3 May 2011. http:/ / www. nap. edu/ catalog. php?record_id=9601#toc [117] Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Emerging Information Infrastructure, National Research Council. (2000) "The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual Property in the Information Age." 3 May 2011. http:/ / www. nap. edu/ catalog. php?record_id=9601#toc [118] Monaghan, Angela. (2007). "Radiohead Challenges Labels With Free Album." Web. 10 May 2011. http:/ / www. telegraph. co. uk/ finance/ markets/ 2816893/ Radiohead-challenges-labels-with-free-album. html [119] Folbre, Nancy. (2011). The Information and Cultural Commons [PowerPoint slides]. [120] Baker, Dean. (2003). "The Artistic Freedom Voucher: An Internet Age Alternative to Copyrights." Pg.2-8. Web. 3 May. 2011. http:/ / www. cepr. net/ documents/ publications/ ip_2003_11. pdf [121] Patent application 58-186100 (http:/ / v3. espacenet. com/ publicationDetails/ biblio?DB=EPODOC& adjacent=true& locale=en_EP& FT=D& date=19850501& CC=JP& NR=60077218A& KC=A) (Publication #60-077218), Software Control System, Japan Patent Office, October 5, 1983, Ryoichi Mori, applicant. Reported by Industrial Property Digital Library.

Further reading • Lawrence Lessig's Free Culture, published by Basic Books in 2004, is available for free download in PDF format (http://free-culture.cc/freecontent/). The book is a legal and social history of copyright. Lessig is well known, in part, for arguing recent landmark cases on copyright law. A Professor of Law at Stanford University, Lessig writes for an educated lay audience, including for non-lawyers. He is, for the most part, an opponent of DRM technologies. • Rosenblatt, B. et al., Digital Rights Management: Business and Technology, published by M&T Books (John Wiley & Sons) in 2001. An overview of DRM technology, business implications for content publishers, and relationship to U.S. copyright law. • Consumer's Guide to DRM (http://www.indicare.org/tiki-page.php?pageName=ConsumerGuide), published in 10 languages (Czech, German, Greek, English, Spanish, French, Hungarian, Italian, Polish, Swedish), produced by the INDICARE research and dialogue project (http://www.indicare.org) • Eberhard Becker, Willms Buhse, Dirk Günnewig, Niels Rump: Digital Rights Management - Technological, Economic, Legal and Political Aspects. An 800 page compendium from 60 different authors on DRM. • Arun Sundararajan's Managing Digital Piracy: Pricing and Protection (http://isr.journal.informs.org/cgi/ content/abstract/15/3/287) uses the following digital rights conjecture, that "digital rights increases the incidence of digital piracy, and that managing digital rights therefore involves restricting the rights of usage that contribute to customer value" to show that creative pricing can be an effective substitute for excessively stringent DRM. • Fetscherin, M., Implications of Digital Rights Management on the Demand for Digital Content, provides an excellent view on DRM from a consumers perspective. "Buch- und online Publikationen" (http://www. dissertation.de/index.php3?active_document=buch.php3&buch=4731). dissertation.de. 1998-02-05. Retrieved 2010-08-31. • The Pig and the Box, a book with colorful illustrations and having a coloring book version, by 'MCM'. It describes DRM in terms suited to kids, written in reaction to a Canadian entertainment industry copyright education initiative, aimed at children. • Present State and Emerging Scenarios of Digital Rights Management Systems - A paper by Marc Fetscherin which provides an overview of the various components of DRM, pro and cons and future outlook of how, where,

Digital rights management when such systems might be used. • DRM is Like Paying for Ice (http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/6002/drm.html) - Richard Menta article on MP3 Newswire discusses how DRM is implemented in ways to control consumers, but is undermining perceived product value in the process. • A Semantic Web Approach to Digital Rights Management (http://rhizomik.net/~roberto/thesis) - PhD Thesis by Roberto García that tries to address DRM issues using Semantic Web technologies and methodologies. • Patricia Akester, "Technological Accommodation of Conflicts between Freedom of Expression and DRM: The First Empirical Assessment" available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1469412 (unveiling, through empirical lines of enquiry, (1) whether certain acts which are permitted by law are being adversely affected by the use of DRM and (2) whether technology can accommodate conflicts between freedom of expression and DRM).

External links • Copyright and Technology (http://copyrightandtechnology.com) Blog featuring analysis of digital rights technologies and related legal issues • BBC News |Technology (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6337781.stm) Q&A: What is DRM? • Copyright vs Community in the Age of Computer Networks (http://csclub.uwaterloo.ca/media/Copyright vs Community in the Age of Computer Networks.html) by Richard Stallman • Digital Bits Skeptic (http://www.dbskeptic.com/2009/01/18/drm-is-failure-in-action/) DRM technology in media publishing • Digital Rights Management (http://europa.eu/comm/enterprise/ict/policy/doc/drm.pdf) from CEN/ISSS (European Committee for Standardization / Information Society Standardization System). Contains a range of possible definitions for DRM from various stakeholders. 30 September 2003 • PC Game Piracy Examined (http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html) Article investigating the effects of DRM and piracy on the video game industry • Windows Media DRM FAQ (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/forpros/drm/faq.aspx) from Microsoft • www.radiovalladolid.com (http://www.radiovalladolid.com/?page_id=166/) How to build a circuit for the reception of DRM

Article Sources and Contributors

Article Sources and Contributors Copyright infringement Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=429259447 Contributors: (, 16@r, 2, 50Stars, ABCD, AVRS, Absolon, Adabow, Adnandx, Aelffin, Agentjacob, Ahoerstemeier, Ajaxkroon, Alansohn, Alex Stacey, Alex756, AlexanderKDavid, All in, Andrewpmk, Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The, Antientropic, AntonyMelrose, Ap, Arpitt, Arru, Atama, AuburnPilot, Audiodude, Avicennasis, BD2412, BVBede, Baileypalblue, Beetstra, Bemsor, Bhumiya, Binksternet, Bobmack89x, Bobo192, Bobrayner, Bongwarrior, BonniePrinceCharlie, Brendan Moody, Brighterorange, Buckyboy314, Bunburya, Byronknoll, Caltas, Can't sleep, clown will eat me, Canadian, Canadian Scouter, CatherineMunro, Cauri, CesarB, Chandon, Charles Matthews, Chevinki, Chochopk, Chris Bainbridge, ColdWind, Coolcaesar, Coptervibes, Cs-wolves, Csaba Jancsovics, Cvf4, Cynical, D-Rock, DARTH SIDIOUS 2, DMG413, DMacks, Da Vynci, Damian Yerrick, Danelo, Danielhythloday, Dave.Dunford, Daveswagon, David.Monniaux, Dbiel, Dcoetzee, DeadEyeArrow, Deanlaw, Deathawk, Demus666, DerHexer, Diego.cayetano, Dipper2, Dogru144, DonovanBOOM, Dostal, Dr-Victor-von-Doom, Dreamafter, Drentaus, Drewhinote, DropDeadGorgias, Dthomsen8, Dynablaster, Eastlaw, Edcolins, Edward, Edwardsdl, Edwy, Elf, Elpe, Epbr123, Erianna, Ernstk, Escape Orbit, Euniana, Evanscottmorgan, Evq, F. Cosoleto, Fairyfan, Favonian, FernandoTorres, FisherQueen, Flowanda, Flyguy649, Freakofnurture, Frecklefoot, GDallimore, Galoubet, Gary King, Gilliam, Gkennaugh, Glen, Gobonobo, Gogo Dodo, GreatBigCircles, Grenavitar, Ground, Guaka, Guardians611, Guyjohnston, Gx872op, H2g2bob, Haakon, HaeB, Hairy Dude, Hajatvrc, Harry, Hartboy, Hstimson, Hurricane111, Hvs, Igordebraga, Ihcoyc, Indian.advocate, Insommia, Interchange88, IntrigueBlue, IronGargoyle, Ish ishwar, Ixfd64, J.delanoy, J04n, JCUK83, Jacopo, JamesBWatson, Jamesday, Janarius, Japanese Searobin, Jaxboy32, JayKeaton, JeffBillman, Jerry, Jersyko, Jivee Blau, Joelee, Jojhutton, Josh Parris, Jrockway, JulesH, Jurcking, Jxyama, Kafuffle, Katana0182, Kidradical, Kilo-Lima, Kinaro, Kingturtle, Klemen Kocjancic, KnightRider, Kornfan71, Kozuch, Ksaj, Kuru, LadyDedlock, Lambiam, Law, Lcarscad, Lee Carre, Leemcd56, Lerichard, Lisamh, Loadmaster, Losmurfs, Lotje, Lottamiata, Loulanfengsha, Luckas Blade, Lying from You, M0rphz, MPLX, MSchmahl, MXER, Madman91, Mahanga, Mailman9, Malcolmxl5, Maralia, Marek69, Marilyn.hanson, MarkSweep, Martarius, Materialscientist, Mattisse, Mav, Mb1000, Mdz, Mellery, Mervyn, Metagraph, Metaprimer, Mgeni847, Mhaitham.shammaa, Michael Essmeyer, Michael Hardy, Mike 7, Mike Serfas, MikeRS, Miraculouschaos, Mirv, Mjb, Moez, Moonriddengirl, Morwen, Mr2001, MrOllie, Mthteh, Murder1, Mygerardromance, Myswedishuncle, NCurse, Nahome, Nazi Obama, Nazlfrag, Nbarth, NetRolller 3D, Netkinetic, Nicholas Perkins, NickW557, Noommos, Nowa, Nunquam Dormio, Nv8200p, Octahedron80, Oducado, Ohnoitsjamie, Onyx86, Orange Goblin, Oscar Alho II, Osmodius, ParalegalRon, Pcb21, Penbat, Petri Krohn, Phalariz, Philip Trueman, Pictureupdater, Plerdsus, Plghwqxc, Poptard64avgn, Postdlf, PullUpYourSocks, Qworty, Qwyrxian, RACHCIS2011, RG2, RJASE1, RJaguar3, Radagast83, RadioFan, Rain Matrix, Ran, Raven4x4x, Razeen2008, Realized, Reaper Eternal, Reinis, RekishiEJ, Remember the dot, Rhlitonjua, Rickington, Rjwilmsi, Rmt2m, Robbytein, Rodhullandemu, Rory096, RossPatterson, Rough, Rustl, S33k3r, SF007, Salvio giuliano, Samael775, Samwb123, Sango123, SasiSasi, Scientus, Seans Potato Business, Shreevatsa, Silivrenion, Simetrical, Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington, SkepticalMaverick, Skyezx, Sl, SoCalSuperEagle, Sockatume, Sonjaaa, Sp, SpikeToronto, Springfield, New Tacoma, Staffwaterboy, StaticGull, Steel, Stillwaterising, Stredler, Strongbadman, SukidoNymira, SunCreator, Superm401, TJRC, Tainted Conformity, Tazmaniacs, Tbo 157, Tedickey, Tedius Zanarukando, Teh Squonkz, Terence, Th1rt3en, The Anome, The Cunctator, The Raven's Apprentice, The Thing That Should Not Be, The Utahraptor, Thehelpfulone, Thingg, Tim Ivorson, TimGrin, Timwi, Tobble, Tom Edwards, Toppler, Train2104, Tregoweth, Trixt, Ty683g542, TylerRick, Ukexpat, Unbreakable MJ, Unyoyega, Uod Wafu, Vansamirin, Velella, VernoWhitney, Vrenator, Wavelength, WayneFBerry, Wayward, Webgeer, Wesley M. Curtus, WestallIsTheDevil, Whereizben, WhisperToMe, Wik, Wiki alf, WikiSlasher, Wikify567, WikipedianMarlith, Willking1979, Wskitche, XJDHDR, Xenophonf, Yellowdesk, Yelyos, Yettie0711, Zap Rowsdower, Zephyrad, Zerak-Tul, ZeusHermesDavid, Zhackwyatt, Zigger, 570 anonymous edits Impact of illegal downloading on the film industry Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=429249847 Contributors: HelloAnnyong, Jamesrules90, King of Hearts, Mandarax, MrKIA11, NortyNort, RACHCIS2011, VernoWhitney, 3 anonymous edits File sharing Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=428701580 Contributors: *drew, .:Ajvol:., 122589423KM, 209.75.42.xxx, 21655, 217.98.151.xxx, A333, ACNS, AVRS, Aackert, Abitcrispy, AdamWill, Aftertheend, Ahtih, Aitias, Alansohn, Aldie, Ale jrb, Alex Stacey, Algae, Altzinn, An97an, Analoguedragon, Andorin Kato, Andromeda, Andycjp, Angela, Anish7, Antandrus, Anthon.Eff, AntiVan, Antoniad, Aowens1993, Ap, Aquaman321, Arienh4, Arnowaschk, ArtemisChook, As286, Atatton3, Atbk, AussieBoy, BGOATDoughnut, Bailey2007player, Barek, Bass fishing physicist, Bax2x, Belgarat, Belgarath TS, Belugaperson, Bestbrain007, Bigtimepeace, Blanchardb, Bloodshedder, Blue eyes gold dragon, Bluescrubbie, Bobba addict39, Boblankin, Bobo192, Bogsat, Bonadea, Bootleg42, Bpringlemeir, Bradman3001, Brandon, Breno, Brianga, Brtkrbzhnv, Btrest, Buster2058, Ca michelbach, Caggegi229, Calton, Cambrasa, CapitalR, Carothuf, CatherineMunro, CesarB, Cflm001, CharlesGillingham, Charlesjustice, Cheeser1, Chininazu12, Cholmes75, Chriscm, Chuunen Baka, CieloEstrellado, Cleverbeans, Coastermech, Coloradorocket, Comm12peers, Compclass2009, Confuciou, Conversion script, Cowpriest2, Crash Underride, Cunard, DJPhazer, DMG413, DMacks, DVdm, Dadu, Damian Yerrick, Dan Stelian, DanielCD, Darwin's Bulldog, David Levy, Davidingram, Dawynn, Dayewalker, Deathmolor, DecadeMan, Delirium, Den fjättrade ankan, Descent, Dg1nsw, Diomidis Spinellis, Discospinster, Divagirl459, Dmitris-bat-girl, Don Black, Dotmusik, Doulos Christos, Dragonmaster88, Dreamwinder, Drlnpstr, DropDeadGorgias, Dynablaster, Dysfunktion, Dysprosia, Easyas12c, Eenu, El C, ElationAviation, Elmagnon, Elsendero, Emerybob, Emufarmers, Endlessnameless, Epbr123, Epimorph, Eric-Wester, Erikhansson1, Eternal-Entropy, EurekaLott, Eurobas, Eurotrance03, Everyking, Evil Monkey, Excirial, Eyreland, FT2, FadedRed, Faithlessthewonderboy, Fennec, FenristheWolf, FisherQueen, Flummoxdesignsdotinfo, Frap, Freakofnurture, Fredrik, Fremte, GHIUA, Gabbe, Gaius Cornelius, Gardar Rurak, Gatekreeper, Gemini777, Generic69, Ghenadie, Gib2504, Gigajohn, GilesMT, Glebber, Glenn, Gmaxwell, Gobonobo, Gogo Dodo, Gracefool, Graciella, GraemeL, Grafen, Graham87, Ground, Guppie, Gurch, Guyjohnston, Haakon, Hadal, Hartboy, Headbomb, HelloAnnyong, Hiphats, Holme053, Hracjk, Hu12, Humblefool, HupHollandHup, Hyacinth, ISOS V, Iainelder, Ianblair23, Ianwarren, Icedog, Icefresh, Ikescs, Ikip, Immunize, Imz, Inter, Intgr, Iridescent, Irishguy, Isaac Dupree, Isnow, J.delanoy, JJLeahy, JLaTondre, JYolkowski, Jake Wasdin, James P Twomey, Jamesday, Jarred521, Jeff3000, Jennavecia, Jnc, John of Reading, JonHarder, Jossi, Joy, Jujutacular, Jusdafax, Jwrivers, Jzcool, KLLvr283, Kanedogg, Karol Langner, KayTee.BayBeeh.Xx, Kbrose, Keegscee, Keith Edkins, Kelly Martin, Kermit2, Kerrchdavis, Kerrytanner35, Kim Bruning, Kimero, Kingturtle, Kittycatkeith, Kjl, Kl4m, Kmasters0, Knucmo2, Kokoito, Kuru, Kzm, LCamara, Lairdp, Larry laptop, Laschatzer, Laurusnobilis, Law, Leaderofearth, Lenoxus, Lensi, Leuk he, Lexi Marie, Linuxbeak, LiquidHAL, Llykstw, Lotje, Luk, Luna Santin, Lysdexia, M, Magical Duel Guy, Mahanga, Maktoom, Male1979, Mange01, Marek69, Mark Richards, Maroux, Martinlc, Massysett, Master Bob, Matthew Stannard, Matthewedwards, Mattisse, Matturn, Mavol, Mbh, Mboverload, McDutchie, Meembo, Meneth, Michael Hardy, MiguelTremblay, MikeADorfman21, Mikeblas, Mikenolte, Mikker, Mindmatrix, Minesweeper, Minna Sora no Shita, Miremare, Mirgolth, Misza13, Miym, Mjb, Modster, Moe Epsilon, Moehre, Monsterseas, MorgothX, Mosswoodmedia, Mp3hist, MrOllie, MsCardsEtiquette, Myanw, Mytempdir, Mywymedia, NPswimdude500, Nakon, Ncusa367, Ne0Freedom, NeaNita, Neilc, Nethgirb, NewEnglandYankee, Newbie82, Newouch, Nickptar, Nicodh, Nihiltres, Nixdorf, Noian, Non-dropframe, Notinasnaid, Nowhither, Nsaa, NuMetal99, NuclearWarfare, Objective3000, Odoketa, Ohnoitsjamie, Old Death, Olegwiki, Omarmalali, Omniplex, Ondertitel, Oren0, OwenX, P3net, PabloCastellano, Pahari Sahib, Pakaran, Paranoid, Parsiferon, PatrickFisher, Paul Ruch, Paveen, Pavel Vozenilek, Peyre, Philharmoni, Philip Trueman, Pierregigatribe, PinchasC, Pnm, Pol098, PopUpPirate, Portia327, Postdlf, PowerKong, Pparazorback, Psy guy, Pteren, Pterknight1975, Quadell, Quarl, RACHCIS2011, Ran4, Raraoul, RayBeckerman, Razeen2008, Rbrwr, RedWolf, Reedkickball, Remrem13, Requestion, Rettetast, Rfvsydysb, Rich Farmbrough, Richard001, Rick 50000, Rjaf29, Rjw62, Rjwilmsi, RobertBorgersen, Rockclimbingnut, Rodrigogomespaixao, RoninRVP, Rory096, RoyBoy, Rubberducky93, Rurik, Rvalles, Ryulong, Sabranan, Sagargp, Saimhe, Salix alba, Sam Hocevar, SamiKaero, Samuelsen, Sarrem4, SasiSasi, Sastep3, Satori Son, Savidan, Sayatv, Scepia, SchmuckyTheCat, Schneelocke, Scientus, Scott0xa28, SeanMooney, Seaphoto, Sedulus, SexyBern, Shareonthenet, Sharpdust, ShaunMacPherson, ShelfSkewed, Shii, Shoefly, ShredFred, Shreevatsa, Sietse Snel, Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington, Sjakkalle, Sjö, Slantboy, Slash, Smyth, SoWhy, Soleildevie, Soliloquial, Solitude, SorenWiki, Sorezki, Sourcejedi, Speedoflight, SqueakBox, StanJRules, Stanjl50, Starylon, Stephenchou0722, Stereotek, Stevertigo, Stw, SuperMarius, Supergeo, Sv1xv, Synchrite, TJRC, Tabletop, Taboo Tongue, TakuyaMurata, Talrias, Tannkremen, Technocomm, Terrifictriffid, ThaddeusB, Thanos777, The Realms of Gold, The Thing That Should Not Be, The very model of a minor general, Theplanetsaturn, Theshibboleth, Thingg, Thommi, Thumperward, Tide rolls, Timwi, Tjoneslo, Tmrwolf, Tobias Hoevekamp, Todd Vierling, Tommy2010, TouristPhilosopher, Toussaint, Tregoweth, Tresiden, Tristanb, True Vox, Tschild, Tstrobaugh, Ttlr113, Twsx, Ubuntu Dude, Ultra-Loser, Un4v41l48l3, Uriyan, Utcursch, VBGFscJUn3, Vadmium, Varnav, Versageek, Versus22, Veyklevar, Viande hachée, Vilerage, Violetriga, Visor, Vorash, Wavelength, Wayfarer, Wayward, Wellreadone, Werdna, WereSpielChequers, Wernher, Wezzo, Wiesel 99, Wikispan, Wimt, WinContro, Wolfkeeper, Xp54321, YUL89YYZ, Yamamoto Ichiro, Yonatan, Ypacaraí, ZimZalaBim, Zoicon5, Zollerriia, Zondi, ZooFari, Ztobor, Zzuuzz, Äppelmos, Ғїяеѕкатея, 1168 anonymous edits Metallica v. Napster, Inc. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=429262434 Contributors: Bcca15, Chzz, Cookeri6, Deanlaw, Erpert, Lotje, Mandarax, Medeis, Miyagawa, P. S. Burton, Robert K S, 2 anonymous edits The Pirate Bay trial Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=428154817 Contributors: 0xFE, Age Happens, Ahjmorton, Ahruman, Alan Liefting, Amatulic, AndrewBuck, Andy Marchbanks, Apoc2400, Art LaPella, Asarlaí, Boatsdesk, Bobsijswinkel, Bonadea, BorgQueen, CFCF, Carter666, Chris the speller, CommonsDelinker, Conti, Cybercobra, Darkcat1, Darrell Greenwood, Davidgothberg, Dcabrilo, Debresser, Destynova, Devin122, Download, Dragonnas, Dream out loud, Drilnoth, DugOLas, E0steven, Easyas12c, Echosmoke, Ed g2s, Edderso, EditorInTheRye, Entheta, Equazcion, Erianna, Esn, Eternalschala, Exe89, Felsir, Fenwayguy, Floker, Fnovd, GDallimore, Gabbe, Gabe1089, Gamsbart, Gary King, Geni, GetMKWearMKFly, Gimmethegepgun, Giraffedata, Gobeirne, Hairy Dude, Haljordan1000, Hapsala, Henrik, Hiwk, Honette, Howcheng, Husky, Hyperthermia, Int21h, Intimidated, JEdgarFreeman, Jan Hofmann, JeremyWJ, Jerry, Julle, Kingpin13, Kingsloknah, Krogman, LarRan, Leandrod, Lemming64, Mattbuck, Mattgirling, Maury Markowitz, Maziotis, Meco, Mentifisto, Micke, Miqademus, Mkikta, Motsjo, Mp3hist, Mtjaws, NJA, Noian, Northgrove, O14vO1av, Objective3000, Oknazevad, Outriggr, PabloCastellano, Para, Perstar, Phlar, Pi Guy 31415, Pinethicket, Plrk, Postdlf, Prashanthns, Preslethe, Prolog, Quispiam, R'n'B, Rakkar, RealGrouchy, Rich Farmbrough, Rurik, SasiSasi, Sceptre, Sertmann, Shatner, Shreevatsa, Sixdown, Skizzik, Skomorokh, Sligocki, Solid Reign, Staka, StaticVision, Supernaut242, Tbhotch, Tcncv, Ted87, Teemu08, Telanis, Tense, TheMatty, Thecheesinator, Themoodyblue, Tide rolls, Tim!, Toa Zach, Tomas e, Tpbradbury, Tstrobaugh, Twas Now, Unionhawk, Veteropinguis, Voodoo Jobu, Warpozio, WereSpielChequers, WikiLaurent, Winterus, Woohookitty, XP1, Yarnalgo, Yellowdesk, Ysangkok, ZeroOne, Zundark, 143 anonymous edits Music download Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=428312936 Contributors: 4I7.4I7, ABF, ACSE, AUDIOSHACK, Abd011, Abudevo, Acather96, Achimm, Aecis, Afterthought67, Ajit garga, Alansohn, Alecsdaniel, Algebraist, AllySDude, Anosim, Ante Aikio, Apparition11, Arnyg1, Arthena, Bandoftheweek, Beetstra, Birigogos, Blake.Schneider, Blogreviews, Bobo192, BorgQueen, BostonMA, Bridgeplayer, Brittoni, Bryce, Bubba73, Butterscotch, Caltas, Can't sleep, clown will eat me, Capricorn42, Ccacsmss, Chasingsol, Chzz, Cjeam, Closetoeuphoria, Coyote711, Crokis.chile, Cuckoofridge, Cureden, DARTH SIDIOUS 2, Daimore, Demonblade, Derild4921, Dffgd, Dimre01, Doniago, Drlnpstr, East718, Edcolins, Eddyspeeder, Elberth 00001939, Ericorbit, Explicit, Firepaw389, Flewis, Floodamanny, Funandtrvl, Gabbe, Gary King, GcSwRhIc, Googoohead, Graham87, Hak686, HalfShadow, Harryboyles,

Article Sources and Contributors Haseo9999, HeckXX, IW.HG, IanVastal, Immunize, Interlingua, Iridescent, J.delanoy, Janejellyroll, Jaranda, JeremyA, Jersyko, Jh51681, Jiggermeister, Jiteshkumawat, Jreconomy, Jren207, Justanother80808080, Jwhimmelspach, KelleyCook, Kisholi, Kmsiever, Kollision, Kookyunii, Kounagihishouka, Kristofski, Kungming2, L'Aquatique, Leon7, LiamUK, Lotje, Lstreak1, Luigifan, Madeinsane, Mark Richards, Mauler90, Megaposiedon, Metropolitan90, Mild Bill Hiccup, Mindmatrix, Mortenoesterlundjoergensen, MrOllie, Noctibus, Nsaa, Old Guard, Owartoffice, Oxymoron83, Pegship, Philg88, Philip Trueman, Piano non troppo, Plghwqxc, Pr103, Prodego, Pumpmeup, Qwerty Binary, Redditch1000, RichV, Rifisherman, Rm w a vu, Robdurbar, Rwalker, Rwwww, Samguyver, Sapphirewhirlwind, Sauloviegas, SchfiftyThree, Schrojon, SchuminWeb, Shadowjams, Sir Lothar, Slgcat, Snowolf, Songknighter, Speedemonspecv, Stanleyuroy, Steve Lowther, SwirlBoy39, Tedder, Teles, TenPoundHammer, The Anome, The Rationalist, TheKMan, TheKnight27, Thingg, TigerShark, Tinje, TinyMark, Tsuchiya Hikaru, Tuskah, Uhai, UncleDouggie, Versageek, Violetriga, WIKI-GUY-16, Wayne Slam, Welsh, WikiUserPedia, Woogee, Woohookitty, Yarnalgo, Zmaranda, ZooFari, Zzuuzz, 322 anonymous edits Digital rights management Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=429388878 Contributors: =Josh.Harris, A Clown in the Dark, ABCD, AKemmler, AThing, AaronSw, Abhisek243, Achristopherp1, Addicted2Sanity, Adhemar, Adnandx, Ahdfox, Ahk057, Ahnaqsh, Ahunt, Ajindustries, Akumalite, Alan Isherwood, Alansohn, Alark1, Alberrosidus, Alerante, Alexjohnc3, Algocu, Alison, AlistairMcMillan, Alpha Quadrant, Alpha Slayer, Alveyims, Alyeska, Alzwded, Amalthea, Amberrock, Amire80, Ammosh11, Amorymeltzer, Amren, Andisthermal, Andorin Kato, Andrewferrier, Anduin13, AnonMoos, Antientropic, Apecat, Arichnad, ArnoldReinhold, Aryabhattacharya, Asj85, Astronouth7303, Atbk, Attys, Aupajo, Authr, Autopilot, Babicm@hotmail.com, Badmachine, Barrkel, Barrusj, Bart133, Bartfat, Bash, Bdesham, Beetstra, Belorn, BenFrantzDale, BigSaguaroCactus, Billbowery, Binksternet, Birkett, Blanchardb, Blue Em, BlueGuy213, Bmurph83, Bobblewik, Bogdangiusca, Bonadea, BooBooSpooki, Borock, BrendaEM, BrendanAdkins, Brentbucci, Brentshiely, Brianski, Brianwc, Bryan Derksen, Btball, Bunnyhop11, CMG, Cab88, Camembert, Can't sleep, clown will eat me, Capitalistpiglet, Capricorn42, Captain-tucker, CardinalDan, Catgut, Cdmedia44, CesarB, ChaosMaster, Chensiyuan, Cheros, Chevinki, ChiragPatnaik, Chowbok, Chris 73, Chris Howard, Chris Pickett, ChrisCork, Chuukai, Cla68, ClaudineChionh, ClementChesnin, Cline93, Cmanser, Coemgenus, Colonies Chris, Compn, Confectus, Cool Hand Luke, CoolKoon, Courcelles, Craigb81, Crazycomputers, Crazytales, Crysb, Ctail, Cupioarcanamundi, Cverlo, Cybercobra, Cyberdiablo, Cynical, Cyprus2k1, DACRepair, DEisenbacher, DMurphy, DVdm, Daedelus, Dale Arnett, Damian Yerrick, Danielbirns, Danny, Darcsorrows, Darkein, Darklylit, Darkonc, Darrenhusted, Dast, Dave Nelson, Davecrosby uk, Daveydweeb, David Gerard, David Levy, David.Monniaux, DeadEyeArrow, Deadflagblues, Debresser, Decoy, Deltabeignet, Dicklyon, Dictonarychan, Dispenser, Dkostic, Dlowde, Dmitris-bat-girl, Doc glasgow, Dominicpb, DonDiego, DoubleBlue, Dpbsmith, Dreish, Dreslough, Drewskend, Drewster1829, Droob, Dual Freq, Duke1919, Dwheeler, Edcolins, Edggar, Eequor, Eevee dk, El C, Elvey, Emperorbma, Emufarmers, Enviroboy, Ephilei, EqualRights, Ericlaw02, ErikStewart, Esanchez7587, Estoy Aquí, Euske, Evan3scent, Evensen1982, Exity, Ezeu, Ezhiki, F00dl3, Falco223, Feinoha, Feistyfawn, Fiftyquid, FloNight, Flygon, Folajimi, FoolsWar, Fosnez, FoxInShoes, Frecklefoot, Fredrik, Free wine, Frenchman113, Froth, Fulkrum, Fygte, GFHandel, GRAHAMUK, GTBacchus, Gail, Gaius Cornelius, Gary King, Gerbrant, Getonyourfeet, Ghettoblaster, Gking2224, Gloriamarie, GlynWintle, Gobeirne, Gobonobo, GreatWhiteNortherner, GreenLady UK, GreenReaper, Gronky, Ground Zero, Groyolo, Guacamel, Guaka, Gutenberg29, Guyjohnston, Gwernol, H2g2bob, Haakon, HaeB, Haipa Doragon, Hajenso, HalfShadow, Harmi banik111, Harryboyles, Hartboy, Harvester, Hellisp, HexaChord, Hgaber, Hillshum, HomerJay603, Horkana, Hucz, Hullo exclamation mark, Hvs, IAmChrisTheWiki, IEdML, Iaamart2010, Iam emailer, Icedog, Icep, Ilgiz, Imacreditcard, Imjustmatthew, InShaneee, Inizen, Intgr, Irishmeadow, Ixfd64, J. Finkelstein, J.delanoy, JLaTondre, JVz, Jacob Poon, JaiMoo7, James Brown, James Foster, Jamesday, Jamoche, Jamyskis, Japsu, Jason.sohn, Jbo5112, Jcmeloni, Jebus989, JeremyA, Jermor, Jhsounds, Jialuolu, JiriDonat, Jjamison, Jjeffrey, Jleedev, Jmoorejr, Joedeshon, John, Jojhutton, Joseph thankgod, Josephshine5, JoshuaZ, Jucazero, Julesd, Jushka, Jwoodger, Kaini, Kalmatthew, Kane5187, Karada, Karl Dickman, Katana0182, Kate, Kbiltcli, KelleyCook, Kenb215, Kencf0618, Kenne264, Kevin.k.liu, Kisholi, Kmacroxs, Knownot, Knucklehead2354, Kozuch, Kralizec!, Krampo, KristofferLunden, Kungming2, Kuru, KyleM, KyraVixen, Kzm, LR0131, LaForge, Leif, Lejzy, Leotohill, Lifeonerth, Lightmouse, LilHelpa, Limeguin, Limn, Lineplus, Link2Verity, LittleMissSpecial, Lohat, Lostinlodos, Loyeyoung, Lucdelany, Luk, Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters, Lunkwill, Lyml, MER-C, MK8, MONGO, MPD01605, MacsBug, Madiuq, Malevious, MarSch, Marek Pola, Markjeff, Martin S Taylor, Massysett, Master martin, Masterhomer, Mateo LeFou, Matt Crypto, Mattbr, Mattsimis, Mawfive, MaxDrown, Mayurchanakya, Mazza3, Mb1000, Mboverload, MehrdadAfshari, Melodia, Meneth, Merbabu, Miami33139, Michael Hardy, Michael miceli, Mike Linksvayer, Mike Schwartz, Mimithebrain, Mindmatrix, Mipadi, MisterHand, Misza13, Mitaphane, Mmernex, Mmm72392, Mnooning, Mobiuschic42, Mokshjuneja, Moletrouser, MovingUpp, Mp3michael, MrOllie, Msikma, Murftown, Muzzamo, Mwanner, Mydogategodshat, Nakon, Narom, Nealyboy, Nemonolio, Nescio, Netpsycho, Nezzadar, NickW557, Nihonjoe, Nikai, Nilbert, Nirankar10, Nixdorf, NoExec, Nobantu, Notinasnaid, Nufy8, Nuggetboy, O^O, Obli, Off!, Ohnoitsjamie, Ole Kr, Oli Filth, Omegatron, Omidgl, Omphaloscope, One, Opium, Orangekay, OwenX, Ozzmosis, Pakaran, Paolonesi, Papibear, Parasti, Patrick, Patrickthesquirrel, Paul Abrahams, Paul Millsom, Paul Richter, Pbryan, Pde, Pdub445, Pegship, Pepijn Schmitz, Percommode, Perspective, Peter L, Peter S., Petr.adamek, PhilHibbs, PhilipMW, Piano non troppo, Pinkpedaller, Pit, Plasticup, Pmpdurrant, Predator106, PresN, ProveIt, Psychonaut, Quaeler, Quarl, Quinobi, Qwerty Binary, Qwertyuiop1, Qz, R'n'B, R3m0t, R8Rooy, RJFJR, Radiojon, Rain74, Rallette, RandomHumanoid, Rdsmith4, RealLeo, Rehcsif, Reifman, RevRagnarok, RexNL, Rhobite, Rhonabwy, Rich Farmbrough, Ripe, Rjwilmsi, Rkrater, Rlaager, Rmannion, Rnapier, Rob Ward, Robertmh, Roberts83, Rockclimbingnut, Rocketfairy, Rogargon, Ronz, Rostdo, Royboycrashfan, Rrjanbiah, Rror, Rsm99833, Ruud Koot, Ryan Norton, SF007, ST47, Sakurambo, Sameboat, Samguyver, Sampo Torgo, Scepia, Scientus, Sclek, Scott Illini, Scott McConnell, ScottyWZ, SebastianBreier, Sedasa, Selket, Semorrison, Sensei Le Roof, Seraphimblade, Serf, Sergei76, Seriema, Shaddack, Shanes, Shattered, ShaunMacPherson, Shawnhath, Shii, ShotgunBlues42, Shythylacine, Sigmundg, Sikon, SilverWoodchuck47, Silvio16, Simishag, SimonD, Simonjthorpe, Skafantaris, Skaponer, Skomorokh, Skrapion, Skroob103, Slashme, Sloshy42, Sm3k, Smack, Smurfix, Smurfy, Snailshoes, SnakeTheFox, Snusinow, Soarhead77, Sockatume, Socrates2008, SoftwareDeveloper, Sollerz, Some jerk on the Internet, Soren121, Souldier77, Soumyasch, Speer320, Speon, SpiderJon, Sploited, Spudtater, SqueakBox, Sqying, Srborlongan, Starkiller88, Staxjp, Stephen Shaw, SteveM 001, SteveSims, Stevenfruitsmaak, Strangerz, Suburbanslice, Supadawg, Superm401, Suryadas, Suzanne Moccia, Swatjester, Syncategoremata, TERdON, TML, Tabletop, TakuyaMurata, Talkjack, TashaCurly, Tassedethe, Tazmaniacs, Tcp 200, Tegel, Teknic, Teque5, Teryx, Thatcher, The Anome, The Cunctator, The Land of Smeg, The Obento Musubi, The Rationalist, The Thing That Should Not Be, The zoro, TheSeer, TheSmallUnknown, Thebatfish, Thedoubtfire, Thefirm96, Therealspiffyone, Thibbs, Thingg, Thiseye, Thomas Blomberg, Thomas Larsen, Thruston, Thumperward, Timwi, Tmchk, Tmrwolf, Toastysoul, Toddst1, Tom Edwards, Tom W.M., Tom-, TomTwerk, TonyW, Tonysalos, Torchiest, Towel401, Trevorparsons, Triacylglyceride, Tsetna, Tweenk, Ty580, Ubermensch1979, Ugen64, Unedit, Unyoyega, VBGFscJUn3, VQuakr, Valencianok, Valkyrie17, Variant, Vectro, Veinor, VernoWhitney, ViperSnake151, Volt4ire, Vpa20, WAS 4.250, WJBscribe, WalterGR, Wapcaplet, Warren, Waterfox, Wavelength, Wellreadone, Wereon, Whiner01, White Cat, Widefox, Wikipe-tan, WikipedianMarlith, Wikispan, Willmcgree, Windsurfer078, Wj32, Wk muriithi, Wolfkeeper, Wooddoo-eng, Wsvlqc, Ww, Wyiel, XJDHDR, XMillar, Xaque, Xingularity, Xizer, Xomid, Xompanthy, Xpandnz, Yelgrun, Yellowdaisies42, Youandme, Yuvalrahamim, Zachdms, Zahid Abdassabur, Zaphraud, Zarel, ZimZalaBim, Zolaf, Zootm, Zro, Zzo38, ^demon, ‫فشاک‬ ‫لیقع‬, 1262 anonymous edits

Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors

Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors Image:Copyrightpirates.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Copyrightpirates.jpg License: Public Domain Contributors: Columbia Copyright Office Image:Piracy is a crime - Unskippable Anti-Piracy track.png Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Piracy_is_a_crime_-_Unskippable_Anti-Piracy_track.png License: unknown Contributors: Bkell, Courcelles, H2g2bob, Skoch3, Sven Manguard Image:Torrentcomp small.gif Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Torrentcomp_small.gif License: GNU Free Documentation License Contributors: Holek, Joolz, Mdd, Sputnik, Wikiadd, Wknight94, Ypacaraí, 2 anonymous edits File:Pro piracy demonstration.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Pro_piracy_demonstration.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Contributors: Jon Åslund File:US DC NorCal.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:US_DC_NorCal.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: User:NikNaks93, User:NikNaks93/Gallery File:Rättegången mot TPB - 2009-02-16 (gabbe).jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Rättegången_mot_TPB_-_2009-02-16_(gabbe).jpg License: Public Domain Contributors: User:Gabbe File:Peter gottfried rick marcin2.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Peter_gottfried_rick_marcin2.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors: User:Notwist Image:Piratdemonstration vid Mynttorget - 03 - 2006-06-03 (gabbe).jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Piratdemonstration_vid_Mynttorget_-_03_-_2006-06-03_(gabbe).jpg License: Public Domain Contributors: AxelBoldt, Deadstar, Gabbe, LX, Urbourbo, Väsk, 8 anonymous edits File:Flag of the United States.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Flag_of_the_United_States.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: User:Dbenbenn, User:Indolences, User:Jacobolus, User:Technion, User:Zscout370 File:Flag of Germany.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Flag_of_Germany.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: User:Madden, User:Pumbaa80, User:SKopp File:Flag of Sweden.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Flag_of_Sweden.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: User:Jon Harald Søby File:Flag of Denmark.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Flag_of_Denmark.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: User:Madden File:Neij crop.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Neij_crop.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Contributors: User:Notwist File:Anakata.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Anakata.jpg License: unknown Contributors: User:Micke File:Peter sunde close up.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Peter_sunde_close_up.jpg License: unknown Contributors: xm7 File:Carl lundstrom.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Carl_lundstrom.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Contributors: User:Notwist Image:DRM Is Killing Music.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:DRM_Is_Killing_Music.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: AnonMoos, Bayo, Juiced lemon, Kakurady, Liftarn, Ma-Lik, Midnightcomm, Nicor Image:DRM protest Boston DefectiveByDesign.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:DRM_protest_Boston_DefectiveByDesign.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Contributors: Karen Rustad from Claremont, CA, USA

License

License Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported http:/ / creativecommons. org/ licenses/ by-sa/ 3. 0/